The trafficking of G protein coupled‐receptors (GPCRs) is one of the most exciting areas in cell biology because of recent advances demonstrating that GPCR signaling is spatially encoded. GPCRs, acting in a diverse array of physiological systems, can have differential signaling consequences depending on their subcellular localization. At the plasma membrane, GPCR organization could fine‐tune the initial stages of receptor signaling by determining the magnitude of signaling and the type of effectors to which receptors can couple. This organization is mediated by the lipid composition of the plasma membrane, receptor‐receptor interactions, and receptor interactions with intracellular scaffolding proteins. GPCR organization is subsequently changed by ligand binding and the regulated endocytosis of these receptors. Activated GPCRs can modulate the dynamics of their own endocytosis through changing clathrin‐coated pit dynamics, and through the scaffolding adaptor protein β‐arrestin. This endocytic regulation has signaling consequences, predominantly through modulation of the MAPK cascade. This review explores what is known about receptor sorting at the plasma membrane, protein partners that control receptor endocytosis, and the ways in which receptor sorting at the plasma membrane regulates downstream trafficking and signaling.
It has become increasingly apparent that G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) localization is a master regulator of cell signaling. However, the molecular mechanisms involved in this process are not well understood. To date, observations of intracellular GPCR activation can be organized into two categories: a dependence on OCT3 cationic channel-permeable ligands or the necessity of endocytic trafficking. Using CXC chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) as a model, we identified a third mechanism of intracellular GPCR signaling. We show that independent of membrane permeable ligands and endocytosis, upon stimulation, plasma membrane and internal pools of CXCR4 are post-translationally modified and collectively regulate EGR1 transcription. We found that β-arrestin-1 (arrestin 2) is necessary to mediate communication between plasma membrane and internal pools of CXCR4. Notably, these observations may explain that while CXCR4 overexpression is highly correlated with cancer metastasis and mortality, plasma membrane localization is not. Together these data support a model where a small initial pool of plasma membrane-localized GPCRs are capable of activating internal receptor-dependent signaling events.more » « less
- NSF-PAR ID:
- Publisher / Repository:
- Nature Publishing Group
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Communications Biology
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
In animals, endocytosis of a seven-transmembrane GPCR is mediated by arrestins to propagate or arrest cytoplasmic G protein–mediated signaling, depending on the bias of the receptor or ligand, which determines how much one transduction pathway is used compared to another. In
Arabidopsis thaliana, GPCRs are not required for G protein–coupled signaling because the heterotrimeric G protein complex spontaneously exchanges nucleotide. Instead, the seven-transmembrane protein AtRGS1 modulates G protein signaling through ligand-dependent endocytosis, which initiates derepression of signaling without the involvement of canonical arrestins. Here, we found that endocytosis of AtRGS1 initiated from two separate pools of plasma membrane: sterol-dependent domains and a clathrin-accessible neighborhood, each with a select set of discriminators, activators, and candidate arrestin-like adaptors. Ligand identity (either the pathogen-associated molecular pattern flg22 or the sugar glucose) determined the origin of AtRGS1 endocytosis. Different trafficking origins and trajectories led to different cellular outcomes. Thus, in this system, compartmentation with its associated signalosome architecture drives biased signaling.
Abstract Background information
Phosphatidylinositol (PI) is an essential phospholipid, critical to membrane bilayers. The complete deacylation of PI by B‐type phospholipases produces intracellular and extracellular glycerophosphoinositol (GPI). Extracellular GPI is transported into the cell via Git1, a member of the Major Facilitator Superfamily of transporters at the yeast plasma membrane. Internalized GPI is degraded to produce inositol, phosphate and glycerol, thereby contributing to these pools.
GIT1gene expression is controlled by nutrient balance, with phosphate or inositol starvation increasing GIT1expression to stimulate GPI uptake. However, less is known about control of Git1 protein levels or localization. Results
We find that the α‐arrestins, an important class of protein trafficking adaptor, regulate Git1 localization and this is dependent upon their interaction with the ubiquitin ligase Rsp5. Specifically, α‐arrestin Aly2 stimulates Git1 trafficking to the vacuole under basal conditions, but in response to GPI‐treatment, either Aly1 or Aly2 promote Git1 vacuole trafficking. Cell surface retention of Git1, as occurs in
aly1∆ aly2∆ cells, is linked to impaired growth in the presence of exogenous GPI and results in increased uptake of radiolabeled GPI, suggesting that accumulation of GPI somehow causes cellular toxicity. Regulation of α‐arrestin Aly1 by the protein phosphatase calcineurin improves steady‐state and substrate‐induced trafficking of Git1, however, calcineurin plays a larger role in Git1 trafficking beyond regulation of α‐arrestins. Interestingly, loss of Aly1 and Aly2 increased phosphatidylinositol‐3‐phosphate on the limiting membrane of the vacuole, and this was further exacerbated by GPI addition, suggesting that the effect is partially linked to Git1. Loss of Aly1 and Aly2 leads to increased incorporation of inositol label from [3H]‐inositol‐labelled GPI into PI, confirming that internalized GPI influences PI balance and indicating a role for the a‐arrestins in this regulation. Conclusions
The α‐arrestins Aly1 and Aly2 are novel regulators of Git1 trafficking with previously unanticipated roles in controlling phospholipid distribution and balance.
To our knowledge, this is the first example of α‐arrestin regulation of phosphatidyliniositol‐3‐phosphate levels. In future studies it will be exciting to determine if other α‐arrestins similarly alter PI and PIPs to change the cellular landscape.
G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent the largest group of membrane receptors for transmembrane signal transduction. Ligand-induced activation of GPCRs triggers G protein activation followed by various signaling cascades. Understanding the structural and energetic determinants of ligand binding to GPCRs and GPCRs to G proteins is crucial to the design of pharmacological treatments targeting specific conformations of these proteins to precisely control their signaling properties. In this study, we focused on interactions of a prototypical GPCR, beta-2 adrenergic receptor (β 2 AR), with its endogenous agonist, norepinephrine (NE), and the stimulatory G protein (G s ). Using molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, we demonstrated the stabilization of cationic NE, NE(+), binding to β 2 AR by G s protein recruitment, in line with experimental observations. We also captured the partial dissociation of the ligand from β 2 AR and the conformational interconversions of G s between closed and open conformations in the NE(+)–β 2 AR–G s ternary complex while it is still bound to the receptor. The variation of NE(+) binding poses was found to alter G s α subunit (G s α) conformational transitions. Our simulations showed that the interdomain movement and the stacking of G s α α1 and α5 helices are significant for increasing the distance between the G s α and β 2 AR, which may indicate a partial dissociation of G s α The distance increase commences when G s α is predominantly in an open state and can be triggered by the intracellular loop 3 (ICL3) of β 2 AR interacting with G s α, causing conformational changes of the α5 helix. Our results help explain molecular mechanisms of ligand and GPCR-mediated modulation of G protein activation.more » « less
It is unclear that how subcellular organelles respond to external mechanical stimuli. Here, we investigated the molecular mechanisms by which mechanical force regulates Ca2+ signaling at endoplasmic reticulum (ER) in human mesenchymal stem cells. Without extracellular Ca2+, ER Ca2+ release is the source of intracellular Ca2+ oscillations induced by laser-tweezer-traction at the plasma membrane, providing a model to study how mechanical stimuli can be transmitted deep inside the cell body. This ER Ca2+ release upon mechanical stimulation is mediated not only by the mechanical support of cytoskeleton and actomyosin contractility, but also by mechanosensitive Ca2+ permeable channels on the plasma membrane, specifically TRPM7. However, Ca2+ influx at the plasma membrane via mechanosensitive Ca2+ permeable channels is only mediated by the passive cytoskeletal structure but not active actomyosin contractility. Thus, active actomyosin contractility is essential for the response of ER to the external mechanical stimuli, distinct from the mechanical regulation at the plasma membrane.