Computationally‐predicted CB1 cannabinoid receptor mutants show distinct patterns of salt‐bridges that correlate with their level of constitutive activity reflected in G protein coupling levels, thermal stability, and ligand binding
- 14 February 2013
- Vol. 81 (8), 1304-1317
- https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.24264
Abstract
The cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), a member of the class A G‐protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR) family, possesses an observable level of constitutive activity. Its activation mechanism, however, has yet to be elucidated. Previously we discovered dramatic changes in CB1 activity due to single mutations; T3.46A, which made the receptor inactive, and T3.46I and L3.43A, which made it essentially fully constitutively active. Our subsequent prediction of the structures of these mutant receptors indicated that these changes in activity are explained in terms of the pattern of salt‐bridges in the receptor region involving transmembrane domains 2, 3, 5, and 6. Here we identified key salt‐bridges, R2.37 + D6.30 and D2.63 + K3.28, critical for CB1 inactive and active states, respectively, and generated new mutant receptors that we predicted would change CB1 activity by either precluding or promoting these interactions. We find that breaking the R2.37 + D6.30 salt‐bridge resulted in substantial increase in G‐protein coupling activity and reduced thermal stability relative to the wild‐type reflecting the changes in constitutive activity from inactive to active. In contrast, breaking the D2.63 + K3.28 salt‐bridge produced the opposite profile suggesting this interaction is critical for the receptor activation. Thus, we demonstrate an excellent correlation with the predicted pattern of key salt‐bridges and experimental levels of activity and conformational flexibility. These results are also consistent with the extended ternary complex model with respect to shifts in agonist and inverse agonist affinity and provide a powerful framework for understanding the molecular basis for the multiple stages of CB1 activation and that of other GPCRs in general. Proteins 2013; 81:1304–1317.Keywords
This publication has 89 references indexed in Scilit:
- Bihelix: Towards de novo structure prediction of an ensemble of G‐protein coupled receptor conformationsProteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 2011
- Structural mechanisms of constitutive activation in the C5a receptors with mutations in the extracellular loops: Molecular modeling studyProteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 2011
- Three “hotspots” important for adenosine A2B receptor activation: a mutational analysis of transmembrane domains 4 and 5 and the second extracellular loopPurinergic Signalling, 2011
- Crystal structure of the β2 adrenergic receptor–Gs protein complexNature, 2011
- Structure of a nanobody-stabilized active state of the β2 adrenoceptorNature, 2011
- LCP-Tm: An Assay to Measure and Understand Stability of Membrane Proteins in a Membrane EnvironmentBiophysical Journal, 2010
- Stabilization of the Human β2-Adrenergic Receptor TM4–TM3–TM5 Helix Interface by Mutagenesis of Glu1223.41, A Critical Residue in GPCR StructureJournal of Molecular Biology, 2008
- Crystal structure of a photoactivated deprotonated intermediate of rhodopsinProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006
- A cannabinoid receptor 1 mutation proximal to the DRY motif results in constitutive activity and reveals intramolecular interactions involved in receptor activationBrain Research, 2006
- Mutations of CB1 T210 Produce Active and Inactive Receptor Forms: Correlations with Ligand Affinity, Receptor Stability, and Cellular LocalizationBiochemistry, 2006