Structural basis of GPCR coupling to distinct signal transducers: implications for biased signaling.

Three classes of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) partners - G proteins, GPCR kinases, and arrestins - preferentially bind active GPCRs. Our analysis suggests that the structures of GPCRs bound to these interaction partners available today do not reveal a clear conformational basis for signaling bias, which would have enabled the rational design of biased GRCR ligands. In view of this, three possibilities are conceivable: (i) there are no generalizable GPCR conformations conducive to binding a particular type of partner; (ii) subtle differences in the orientation of individual residues and/or their interactions not easily detectable in the receptor-transducer structures determine partner preference; or (iii) the dynamics of GPCR binding to different types of partners rather than the structures of the final complexes might underlie transducer bias.

ß-Arrestins: Structure, Function, Physiology, and Pharmacological Perspectives.

The two ß-arrestins, ß-arrestin-1 and -2 (systematic names: arrestin-2 and -3, respectively), are multifunctional intracellular proteins that regulate the activity of a very large number of cellular signaling pathways and physiologic functions. The two proteins were discovered for their ability to disrupt signaling via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via binding to the activated receptors. However, it is now well recognized that both ß-arrestins can also act as direct modulators of numerous cellular processes via either GPCR-dependent or -independent mechanisms. Recent structural, biophysical, and biochemical studies have provided novel insights into how ß-arrestins bind to activated GPCRs and downstream effector proteins. Studies with ß-arrestin mutant mice have identified numerous physiologic and pathophysiological processes regulated by ß-arrestin-1 and/or -2. Following a short summary of recent structural studies, this review primarily focuses on ß-arrestin-regulated physiologic functions, with particular focus on the central nervous system and the roles of ß-arrestins in carcinogenesis and key metabolic processes including the maintenance of glucose and energy homeostasis. This review also highlights potential therapeutic implications of these studies and discusses strategies that could prove useful for targeting specific ß-arrestin-regulated signaling pathways for therapeutic purposes. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The two ß-arrestins, structurally closely related intracellular proteins that are evolutionarily highly conserved, have emerged as multifunctional proteins able to regulate a vast array of cellular and physiological functions. The outcome of studies with ß-arrestin mutant mice and cultured cells, complemented by novel insights into ß-arrestin structure and function, should pave the way for the development of novel classes of therapeutically useful drugs capable of regulating specific ß-arrestin functions.

Arrestin-3 binds parkin and enhances parkin-dependent mitophagy.

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.

Functional Role of Arrestin-1 Residues Interacting with Unphosphorylated Rhodopsin Elements.

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.

Solo vs. Chorus: Monomers and Oligomers of Arrestin Proteins.

Three out of four subtypes of arrestin proteins expressed in mammals self-associate, each forming oligomers of a distinct kind. Monomers and oligomers have different subcellular localization and distinct biological functions. Here we summarize existing evidence regarding arrestin oligomerization and discuss specific functions of monomeric and oligomeric forms, although too few of the latter are known. The data on arrestins highlight biological importance of oligomerization of signaling proteins. Distinct modes of oligomerization might be an important contributing factor to the functional differences among highly homologous members of the arrestin protein family.

The Role of Arrestin-1 Middle Loop in Rhodopsin Binding.

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.

Short Arrestin-3-Derived Peptides Activate JNK3 in Cells.

Arrestins were first discovered as suppressors of G protein-mediated signaling by G protein-coupled receptors. It was later demonstrated that arrestins also initiate several signaling branches, including mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades. Arrestin-3-dependent activation of the JNK family can be recapitulated with peptide fragments, which are monofunctional elements distilled from this multi-functional arrestin protein. Here, we use maltose-binding protein fusions of arrestin-3-derived peptides to identify arrestin elements that bind kinases of the ASK1-MKK4/7-JNK3 cascade and the shortest peptide facilitating JNK signaling. We identified a 16-residue arrestin-3-derived peptide expressed as a Venus fusion that leads to activation of JNK3α2 in cells. The strength of the binding to the kinases does not correlate with peptide activity. The ASK1-MKK4/7-JNK3 cascade has been implicated in neuronal apoptosis. While inhibitors of MAP kinases exist, short peptides are the first small molecule tools that can activate MAP kinases.

Biological Role of Arrestin-1 Oligomerization.

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.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin.

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.

Lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins does not serve as phosphate sensor.

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.

Plethora of functions packed into 45 kDa arrestins: biological implications and possible therapeutic strategies.

Mammalian arrestins are a family of four highly homologous relatively small ~ 45 kDa proteins with surprisingly diverse functions. The most striking feature is that each of the two non-visual subtypes can bind hundreds of diverse G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and dozens of non-receptor partners. Through these interactions, arrestins regulate the G protein-dependent signaling by the desensitization mechanisms as well as control numerous signaling pathways in the G protein-dependent or independent manner via scaffolding. Some partners prefer receptor-bound arrestins, some bind better to the free arrestins in the cytoplasm, whereas several show no apparent preference for either conformation. Thus, arrestins are a perfect example of a multi-functional signaling regulator. The result of this multi-functionality is that reduction (by knockdown) or elimination (by knockout) of any of these two non-visual arrestins can affect so many pathways that the results are hard to interpret. The other difficulty is that the non-visual subtypes can in many cases compensate for each other, which explains relatively mild phenotypes of single knockouts, whereas double knockout is lethal in vivo, although cultured cells lacking both arrestins are viable. Thus, deciphering the role of arrestins in cell biology requires the identification of specific signaling function(s) of arrestins involved in a particular phenotype. This endeavor should be greatly assisted by identification of structural elements of the arrestin molecule critical for individual functions and by the creation of mutants where only one function is affected. Reintroduction of these biased mutants, or introduction of monofunctional stand-alone arrestin elements, which have been identified in some cases, into double arrestin-2/3 knockout cultured cells, is the most straightforward way to study arrestin functions. This is a laborious and technically challenging task, but the upside is that specific function of arrestins, their timing, subcellular specificity, and relations to one another could be investigated with precision.

Arrestin makes T cells stop and become active.

T-cell activation requires signaling by T-cell receptors (TCRs) that bind antigen on the antigen-presenting cells (APCs) at the immunological synapse (IS). Sustained signaling requires continuous supply of new TCRs to the IS. In this issue of The EMBO Journal, Fernández-Arenas et al (2014) describe a novel role of ß-arrestin-1 at the IS periphery: endocytosis of TCRs and chemokine CXCR4 receptors. Internalized TCRs are then delivered to the IS, where they engage antigen and support prolonged signaling, whereas CXCR4 internalization stops T-cell migration.

Analyzing the roles of multi-functional proteins in cells: The case of arrestins and GRKs.

Most proteins have multiple functions. Obviously, conventional methods of manipulating the level of the protein of interest in the cell, such as over-expression, knockout or knockdown, affect all of its functions simultaneously. The key advantage of these methods is that over-expression, knockout or knockdown does not require any knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of the function(s) of the protein of interest. The disadvantage is that these approaches are inadequate to elucidate the role of an individual function of the protein in a particular cellular process. An alternative is the use of re-engineered proteins, in which a single function is eliminated or enhanced. The use of mono-functional elements of a multi-functional protein can also yield cleaner answers. This approach requires detailed knowledge of the structural basis of each function of the protein in question. Thus, a lot of preliminary structure-function work is necessary to make it possible. However, when this information is available, replacing the protein of interest with a mutant in which individual functions are modified can shed light on the biological role of those particular functions. Here, we illustrate this point using the example of protein kinases, most of which have additional non-enzymatic functions, as well as arrestins, known multi-functional signaling regulators in the cell.

Uncovering missing pieces: duplication and deletion history of arrestins in deuterostomes.

BACKGROUND: The cytosolic arrestin proteins mediate desensitization of activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via competition with G proteins for the active phosphorylated receptors. Arrestins in active, including receptor-bound, conformation are also transducers of signaling. Therefore, this protein family is an attractive therapeutic target. The signaling outcome is believed to be a result of structural and sequence-dependent interactions of arrestins with GPCRs and other protein partners. Here we elucidated the detailed evolution of arrestins in deuterostomes. RESULTS: Identity and number of arrestin paralogs were determined searching deuterostome genomes and gene expression data. In contrast to standard gene prediction methods, our strategy first detects exons situated on different scaffolds and then solves the problem of assigning them to the correct gene. This increases both the completeness and the accuracy of the annotation in comparison to conventional database search strategies applied by the community. The employed strategy enabled us to map in detail the duplication- and deletion history of arrestin paralogs including tandem duplications, pseudogenizations and the formation of retrogenes. The two rounds of whole genome duplications in the vertebrate stem lineage gave rise to four arrestin paralogs. Surprisingly, visual arrestin ARR3 was lost in the mammalian clades Afrotheria and Xenarthra. Duplications in specific clades, on the other hand, must have given rise to new paralogs that show signatures of diversification in functional elements important for receptor binding and phosphate sensing. CONCLUSION: The current study traces the functional evolution of deuterostome arrestins in unprecedented detail. Based on a precise re-annotation of the exon-intron structure at nucleotide resolution, we infer the gain and loss of paralogs and patterns of conservation, co-variation and selection.

Molecular Mechanisms of GPCR Signaling: A Structural Perspective.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are cell surface receptors that respond to a wide variety of stimuli, from light, odorants, hormones, and neurotransmitters to proteins and extracellular calcium. GPCRs represent the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by many clinically used drugs. Recent studies shed light on the conformational changes that accompany GPCR activation and the structural state of the receptor necessary for the interactions with the three classes of proteins that preferentially bind active GPCRs, G proteins, G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. Importantly, structural and biophysical studies also revealed activation-related conformational changes in these three types of signal transducers. Here, we summarize what is already known and point out questions that still need to be answered. Clear understanding of the structural basis of signaling by GPCRs and their interaction partners would pave the way to designing signaling-biased proteins with scientific and therapeutic potential.

G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinases of the GRK4 Protein Subfamily Phosphorylate Inactive G Protein-coupled Receptors (GPCRs).

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 ß2-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 ß2-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.

G protein-coupled receptor kinases as regulators of dopamine receptor functions.

Actions of the neurotransmitter dopamine in the brain are mediated by dopamine receptors that belong to the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Mammals have five dopamine receptor subtypes, D1 through D5. D1 and D5 couple to Gs/olf and activate adenylyl cyclase, whereas D2, D3, and D4 couple to Gi/o and inhibit it. Most GPCRs upon activation by an agonist are phosphorylated by GPCR kinases (GRKs). The GRK phosphorylation makes receptors high-affinity binding partners for arrestin proteins. Arrestin binding to active phosphorylated receptors stops further G protein activation and promotes receptor internalization, recycling or degradation, thereby regulating their signaling and trafficking. Four non- visual GRKs are expressed in striatal neurons. Here we describe known effects of individual GRKs on dopamine receptors in cell culture and in the two in vivo models of dopamine-mediated signaling: behavioral response to psychostimulants and L-DOPA- induced dyskinesia. Dyskinesia, associated with dopamine super-sensitivity of striatal neurons, is a debilitating side effect of L-DOPA therapy in Parkinson's disease. In vivo, GRK subtypes show greater receptor specificity than in vitro or in cultured cells. Overexpression, knockdown, and knockout of individual GRKs, particularly GRK2 and GRK6, have differential effects on signaling of dopamine receptor subtypes in the brain. Furthermore, deletion of GRK isoforms in select striatal neuronal types differentially affects psychostimulant-induced behaviors. In addition, anti-dyskinetic effect of GRK3 does not require its kinase activity: it is mediated by the binding of its RGS-like domain to Gαq/11, which suppresses Gq/11 signaling. The data demonstrate that the dopamine signaling in defined neuronal types in vivo is regulated by specific and finely orchestrated actions of GRK isoforms.

Arrestin-3 binds c-Jun N-terminal kinase 1 (JNK1) and JNK2 and facilitates the activation of these ubiquitous JNK isoforms in cells via scaffolding.

Non-visual arrestins scaffold mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascades. The c-Jun N-terminal kinases (JNKs) are members of MAPK family. Arrestin-3 has been shown to enhance the activation of JNK3, which is expressed mainly in neurons, heart, and testes, in contrast to ubiquitous JNK1 and JNK2. Although all JNKs are activated by MKK4 and MKK7, both of which bind arrestin-3, the ability of arrestin-3 to facilitate the activation of JNK1 and JNK2 has never been reported. Using purified proteins we found that arrestin-3 directly binds JNK1α1 and JNK2α2, interacting with the latter comparably to JNK3α2. Phosphorylation of purified JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 by MKK4 or MKK7 is increased by arrestin-3. Endogenous arrestin-3 interacted with endogenous JNK1/2 in different cell types. Arrestin-3 also enhanced phosphorylation of endogenous JNK1/2 in intact cells upon expression of upstream kinases ASK1, MKK4, or MKK7. We observed a biphasic effect of arrestin-3 concentrations on phosphorylation of JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 both in vitro and in vivo. Thus, arrestin-3 acts as a scaffold, facilitating JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 phosphorylation by MKK4 and MKK7 via bringing JNKs and their activators together. The data suggest that arrestin-3 modulates the activity of ubiquitous JNK1 and JNK2 in non-neuronal cells, impacting the signaling pathway that regulates their proliferation and survival.