STRUCTURE-FUNCTION STUDIES OF THE METABOTROPIC GLUTAMATE RECEPTOR TYPE 6 (mGluR6) AND COMPARISON WITH RHODOPSIN

Metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 6 (mGluR6), a class C G protein coupled receptor (GPCR), plays a key role in visual signal transduction and is also implicated in addiction. Certain mutations in mGluR6 have been reported to cause congenital stationary night blindness. In spite of the importance of mGluR6, knowledge of the molecular basis of its function is lacking. It is imperative to improve the current understanding of its structure-function relationships, so that selective ligands that modulate its activity can be discovered. Furthermore, functional characterization of mGluR6 is also expected to lead to a better understanding of the general principles underlying the activation mechanism of GPCR family. Rhodopsin is the prototypical class A GPCR and serves as a good comparative model to establish general mechanistic patterns of activation of GPCRs. This thesis describes experimental and computational approaches to characterize the structure-function relationship of mGluR6 and its comparison with rhodopsin.Firstly, inducible stable cell lines with high levels of mGluR6 expression were established. Proper trafficking and folding of mGluR6 in these cell lines were verified. To determine mGluR6 function, existing cell-based and novel membrane-based functional assays were optimized and developed, respectively. These efforts led to the establishment of a robust system that expresses properly folded and functional mGluR6 and enabled structure-function studies to be carried out. Several transmembrane cysteine mutants were created and analyzed with the goal to study the role of the transmembrane domain of mGluR6 in activation mechanism. TM6 of mGluR6 like rhodopsin was found to play a key role in its activation supporting the hypothesis that these two GPCRs may share a general mechanism of activation despite the large sequence divergence. Additional support for this hypothesis was obtained from computational sequence analysis which showed that the highly ranking residues involved in long-range interaction in rhodopsin overlap with the allosteric binding pocket of mGluR6. Finally, with the aim to identify selective ligands for mGluR6, an integrated computational-experimental approach was undertaken. Novel allosteric ligands and possibly selective orthosteric ligands for mGluR6 were identified. Further characterization of these ligands may lead to design of selective ligands for mGluR6

Preferential binding of allosteric modulators to active and inactive conformational states of metabotropic glutamate receptors

Metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) are G protein coupled receptors that play important roles in synaptic plasticity and other neuro-physiological and pathological processes. Allosteric mGluR ligands are particularly promising drug targets because of their modulatory effects – enhancing or suppressing the response of mGluRs to glutamate. The mechanism by which this modulation occurs is not known. Here, we propose the hypothesis that positive and negative modulators will differentially stabilize the active and inactive conformations of the receptors, respectively. To test this hypothesis, we have generated computational models of the transmembrane regions of different mGluR subtypes in two different conformations. The inactive conformation was modeled using the crystal structure of the inactive, dark state of rhodopsin as template and the active conformation was created based on a recent model of the light-activated state of rhodopsin. Ligands for which the nature of their allosteric effects on mGluRs is experimentally known were docked to the modeled mGluR structures using ArgusLab and Autodock softwares. We find that the allosteric ligand binding pockets of mGluRs are overlapping with the retinal binding pocket of rhodopsin, and that ligands have strong preferences for the active and inactive states depending on their modulatory nature. In 8 out of 14 cases (57%), the negative modulators bound the inactive conformations with significant preference using both docking programs, and 6 out of 9 cases (67%), the positive modulators bound the active conformations. Considering results by the individual programs only, even higher correlations were observed: 12/14 (86%) and 8/9 (89%) for ArgusLab and 10/14 (71%) and 7/9 (78%) for AutoDock. These findings strongly support the hypothesis that mGluR allosteric modulation occurs via stabilization of different conformations analogous to those identified in rhodopsin where they are induced by photochemical isomerization of the retinal ligand – despite the extensive differences in sequences between mGluRs and rhodopsin

Structural and Functional Consequences of the Weak Binding of Chlorin e6 to Bovine Rhodopsin.

The chlorophyll-derivative chlorin e6 (Ce6) identified in the retinas of deep-sea ocean fish is proposed to play a functional role in red bioluminescence detection. Fluorescence and 1 H NMR spectroscopy studies with the bovine dim-light photoreceptor, rhodopsin, indicate that Ce6 weakly binds to it with μm affinity. Absorbance spectra prove that red light sensitivity enhancement is not brought about by a shift in the absorbance maximum of rhodopsin. 19 F NMR experiments with samples where 19 F labels are either placed at the cytoplasmic binding site or incorporated as fluorinated retinal indicate that the cytoplasmic domain is highly perturbed by binding, while little to no changes are detected near the retinal. Binding of Ce6 also inhibits G-protein activation. Chemical shift changes in 1 H-15 N NMR spectroscopy of 15 N-Trp labeled bovine rhodopsin reveal that Ce6 binding perturbs the entire structure. These results provide experimental evidence that Ce6 is an allosteric modulator of rhodopsin

Angiotensin receptors in GtoPdb v.2023.1

The actions of angiotensin II (Ang II) are mediated by AT1 and AT2 receptors (nomenclature as agreed by the NC-IUPHAR Subcommittee on Angiotensin receptors [63, 155]), which have around 30% sequence similarity. The decapeptide angiotensin I, the octapeptide angiotensin II and the heptapeptide angiotensin III are endogenous ligands. losartan, candesartan, olmesartan, telmisartan, etc. are clinically used AT1 receptor blockers

Angiotensin receptors (version 2019.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

The actions of angiotensin II (Ang II) are mediated by AT1 and AT2 receptors (nomenclature as agreed by the NC-IUPHAR Subcommittee on Angiotensin receptors [61, 152]), which have around 30% sequence similarity. The decapeptide angiotensin I, the octapeptide angiotensin II and the heptapeptide angiotensin III are endogenous ligands. losartan, candesartan, telmisartan, etc. are clinically used AT1 receptor blockers

Class A Orphans (version 2019.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

Table 1 lists a number of putative GPCRs identified by NC-IUPHAR [191], for which preliminary evidence for an endogenous ligand has been published, or for which there exists a potential link to a disease, or disorder. These GPCRs have recently been reviewed in detail [148]. The GPCRs in Table 1 are all Class A, rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Class A orphan GPCRs not listed in Table 1 are putative GPCRs with as-yet unidentified endogenous ligands.Table 1: Class A orphan GPCRs with putative endogenous ligands GPR3GPR4GPR6GPR12GPR15GPR17GPR20 GPR22GPR26GPR31GPR34GPR35GPR37GPR39 GPR50GPR63GRP65GPR68GPR75GPR84GPR87 GPR88GPR132GPR149GPR161GPR183LGR4LGR5 LGR6MAS1MRGPRDMRGPRX1MRGPRX2P2RY10TAAR2 In addition the orphan receptors GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119 which are reported to respond to endogenous agents analogous to the endogenous cannabinoid ligands have been grouped together (GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119)

Class A Orphans in GtoPdb v.2022.3

Table 1 lists a number of putative GPCRs identified by NC-IUPHAR [161], for which preliminary evidence for an endogenous ligand has been published, or for which there exists a potential link to a disease, or disorder. These GPCRs have recently been reviewed in detail [121]. The GPCRs in Table 1 are all Class A, rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Class A orphan GPCRs not listed in Table 1 are putative GPCRs with as-yet unidentified endogenous ligands.Table 1: Class A orphan GPCRs with putative endogenous ligands GPR3GPR4GPR6GPR12GPR15GPR17GPR20 GPR22GPR26GPR31GPR34GPR35GPR37GPR39 GPR50GPR63GPR65GPR68GPR75GPR84GPR87 GPR88GPR132GPR149GPR161GPR183LGR4LGR5 LGR6MAS1MRGPRDMRGPRX1MRGPRX2P2RY10TAAR2 In addition the orphan receptors GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119 which are reported to respond to endogenous agents analogous to the endogenous cannabinoid ligands have been grouped together (GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119)

Class A Orphans (version 2020.5) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

Table 1 lists a number of putative GPCRs identified by NC-IUPHAR [194], for which preliminary evidence for an endogenous ligand has been published, or for which there exists a potential link to a disease, or disorder. These GPCRs have recently been reviewed in detail [150]. The GPCRs in Table 1 are all Class A, rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Class A orphan GPCRs not listed in Table 1 are putative GPCRs with as-yet unidentified endogenous ligands.Table 1: Class A orphan GPCRs with putative endogenous ligands GPR3 GPR4 GPR6 GPR12 GPR15 GPR17 GPR20 GPR22 GPR26 GPR31 GPR34 GPR35 GPR37 GPR39 GPR50 GPR63 GRP65 GPR68 GPR75 GPR84 GPR87 GPR88 GPR132 GPR149 GPR161 GPR183 LGR4 LGR5 LGR6 MAS1 MRGPRD MRGPRX1 MRGPRX2 P2RY10 TAAR2 In addition the orphan receptors GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119 which are reported to respond to endogenous agents analogous to the endogenous cannabinoid ligands have been grouped together (GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119)

Class A Orphans in GtoPdb v.2021.3

Table 1 lists a number of putative GPCRs identified by NC-IUPHAR [161], for which preliminary evidence for an endogenous ligand has been published, or for which there exists a potential link to a disease, or disorder. These GPCRs have recently been reviewed in detail [121]. The GPCRs in Table 1 are all Class A, rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Class A orphan GPCRs not listed in Table 1 are putative GPCRs with as-yet unidentified endogenous ligands.Table 1: Class A orphan GPCRs with putative endogenous ligands GPR3GPR4GPR6GPR12GPR15GPR17GPR20 GPR22GPR26GPR31GPR34GPR35GPR37GPR39 GPR50GPR63GRP65GPR68GPR75GPR84GPR87 GPR88GPR132GPR149GPR161GPR183LGR4LGR5 LGR6MAS1MRGPRDMRGPRX1MRGPRX2P2RY10TAAR2 In addition the orphan receptors GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119 which are reported to respond to endogenous agents analogous to the endogenous cannabinoid ligands have been grouped together (GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119)

Class A Orphans in GtoPdb v.2023.1

Table 1 lists a number of putative GPCRs identified by NC-IUPHAR [161], for which preliminary evidence for an endogenous ligand has been published, or for which there exists a potential link to a disease, or disorder. These GPCRs have recently been reviewed in detail [121]. The GPCRs in Table 1 are all Class A, rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Class A orphan GPCRs not listed in Table 1 are putative GPCRs with as-yet unidentified endogenous ligands.Table 1: Class A orphan GPCRs with putative endogenous ligands GPR3GPR4GPR6GPR12GPR15GPR17GPR20 GPR22GPR26GPR31GPR34GPR35GPR37GPR39 GPR50GPR63GPR65GPR68GPR75GPR84GPR87 GPR88GPR132GPR149GPR161GPR183LGR4LGR5 LGR6MAS1MRGPRDMRGPRX1MRGPRX2P2RY10TAAR2 In addition the orphan receptors GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119 which are reported to respond to endogenous agents analogous to the endogenous cannabinoid ligands have been grouped together (GPR18, GPR55 and GPR119)