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
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.
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10462482
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Traffic
- Volume:
- 20
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1398-9219
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 121-129
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
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. -
more » « less
Abstract 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.
-
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
-
more » « less
The mating of budding yeast depends on chemotropism, a fundamental cellular process. The two yeast mating types secrete peptide pheromones that bind to GPCRs on cells of the opposite type. Cells find and contact a partner by determining the direction of the pheromone source and polarizing their growth toward it. Actin-directed secretion to the chemotropic growth site (CS) generates a mating projection. When pheromone-stimulated cells are unable to sense a gradient, they form mating projections where they would have budded in the next cell cycle, at a position called the default polarity site (DS). Numerous models have been proposed to explain yeast gradient sensing, but none address how cells reliably switch from the intrinsically determined DS to the gradient-aligned CS, despite a weak spatial signal. Here we demonstrate that, in mating cells, the initially uniform receptor and G protein first polarize to the DS, then redistribute along the plasma membrane until they reach the CS. Our data indicate that signaling, polarity, and trafficking proteins localize to the DS during assembly of what we call the gradient tracking machine (GTM). Differential activation of the receptor triggers feedback mechanisms that bias exocytosis upgradient and endocytosis downgradient, thus enabling redistribution of the GTM toward the pheromone source. The GTM stabilizes when the receptor peak centers at the CS and the endocytic machinery surrounds it. A computational model simulates GTM tracking and stabilization and correctly predicts that its assembly at a single site contributes to mating fidelity.
-
more » « less
Vesicle fusion at the plasma membrane is critical for releasing hormones and neurotransmitters and for delivering the cognate G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) to the cell surface. The SNARE fusion machinery that releases neurotransmitters has been well characterized. In contrast, the fusion machinery that delivers GPCRs is still unknown. Here, using high-speed multichannel imaging to simultaneously visualize receptors and v-SNAREs in real time in individual fusion events, we identify VAMP2 as a selective v-SNARE for GPCR delivery. VAMP2 was preferentially enriched in vesicles that mediate the surface delivery of μ opioid receptor (MOR), but not other cargos, and was required selectively for MOR recycling. Interestingly, VAMP2 did not show preferential localization on MOR-containing endosomes, suggesting that v-SNAREs are copackaged with specific cargo into separate vesicles from the same endosomes. Together, our results identify VAMP2 as a cargo-selective v-SNARE and suggest that surface delivery of specific GPCRs is mediated by distinct fusion events driven by distinct SNARE complexes.
