Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins (version 2019.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins display a common RGS domain that interacts with the GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins, enhancing GTP hydrolysis by stabilising the transition state [29, 419, 418], leading to a termination of GPCR signalling. Interactions through protein:protein interactions of many RGS proteins have been identified for targets other than heteromeric G proteins. Sequence analysis of the 20 RGS proteins suggests four families of RGS: RZ, R4, R7 and R12 families. Many of these proteins have been identified to have effects other than through targetting G proteins. Included here is RGS4 for which a number of pharmacological inhibitors have been described

Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins (version 2020.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

Regulator of G protein Signaling, or RGS, proteins serve an important regulatory role in signaling mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They all share a common RGS domain that directly interacts with active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. RGS proteins stabilize the transition state for GTP hydrolysis on Gα and thus induce a conformational change in the Gα subunit that accelerates GTP hydrolysis, thereby effectively turning off signaling cascades mediated by GPCRs. This GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity is the canonical mechanism of action for RGS proteins, although many also possess additional functions and domains. RGS proteins are divided into four families, R4, R7, R12 and RZ based on sequence homology, domain structure as well as specificity towards Gα subunits. For reviews on RGS proteins and their potential as therapeutic targets, see e.g. [160, 377, 411, 415, 416, 512, 519, 312, 6]

Lessons Learned from a Decade of Sudden Oak Death in California: Evaluating Local Management

Sudden Oak Death has been impacting California’s coastal forests for more than a decade. In that time, and in the absence of a centrally organized and coordinated set of mandatory management actions for this disease in California’s wildlands and open spaces, many local communities have initiated their own management programs. We present five case studies to explore how local-level management has attempted to control this disease. From these case studies, we glean three lessons: connections count, scale matters, and building capacity is crucial. These lessons may help management, research, and education planning for future pest and disease outbreaks

The Yeast La Related Protein Slf1p Is a Key Activator of Translation during the Oxidative Stress Response

The mechanisms by which RNA-binding proteins control the translation of subsets of mRNAs are not yet clear. Slf1p and Sro9p are atypical-La motif containing proteins which are members of a superfamily of RNA-binding proteins conserved in eukaryotes. RIP-Seq analysis of these two yeast proteins identified overlapping and distinct sets of mRNA targets, including highly translated mRNAs such as those encoding ribosomal proteins. In paralell, transcriptome analysis of slf1Δ and sro9Δ mutant strains indicated altered gene expression in similar functional classes of mRNAs following loss of each factor. The loss of SLF1 had a greater impact on the transcriptome, and in particular, revealed changes in genes involved in the oxidative stress response. slf1Δ cells are more sensitive to oxidants and RIP-Seq analysis of oxidatively stressed cells enriched Slf1p targets encoding antioxidants and other proteins required for oxidant tolerance. To quantify these effects at the protein level, we used label-free mass spectrometry to compare the proteomes of wild-type and slf1Δ strains following oxidative stress. This analysis identified several proteins which are normally induced in response to hydrogen peroxide, but where this increase is attenuated in the slf1Δ mutant. Importantly, a significant number of the mRNAs encoding these targets were also identified as Slf1p-mRNA targets. We show that Slf1p remains associated with the few translating ribosomes following hydrogen peroxide stress and that Slf1p co-immunoprecipitates ribosomes and members of the eIF4E/eIF4G/Pab1p ‘closed loop’ complex suggesting that Slf1p interacts with actively translated mRNAs following stress. Finally, mutational analysis of SLF1 revealed a novel ribosome interacting domain in Slf1p, independent of its RNA binding La-motif. Together, our results indicate that Slf1p mediates a translational response to oxidative stress via mRNA-specific translational control

Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins in GtoPdb v.2021.2

Regulator of G protein Signaling, or RGS, proteins serve an important regulatory role in signaling mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They all share a common RGS domain that directly interacts with active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. RGS proteins stabilize the transition state for GTP hydrolysis on Gα and thus induce a conformational change in the Gα subunit that accelerates GTP hydrolysis, thereby effectively turning off signaling cascades mediated by GPCRs. This GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity is the canonical mechanism of action for RGS proteins, although many also possess additional functions and domains. RGS proteins are divided into four families, R4, R7, R12 and RZ based on sequence homology, domain structure as well as specificity towards Gα subunits. For reviews on RGS proteins and their potential as therapeutic targets, see e.g. [225, 529, 578, 583, 584, 742, 753, 444, 10]

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2023/24:Introduction and Other Protein Targets

The Concise Guide to PHARMACOLOGY 2023/24 is the sixth in this series of biennial publications. The Concise Guide provides concise overviews, mostly in tabular format, of the key properties of approximately 1800 drug targets, and about 6000 interactions with about 3900 ligands. There is an emphasis on selective pharmacology (where available), plus links to the open access knowledgebase source of drug targets and their ligands (www.guidetopharmacology.org), which provides more detailed views of target and ligand properties. Although the Concise Guide constitutes almost 500 pages, the material presented is substantially reduced compared to information and links presented on the website. It provides a permanent, citable, point-in-time record that will survive database updates. The full contents of this section can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.16176. In addition to this overview, in which are identified 'Other protein targets' which fall outside of the subsequent categorisation, there are six areas of focus: G protein-coupled receptors, ion channels, nuclear hormone receptors, catalytic receptors, enzymes and transporters. These are presented with nomenclature guidance and summary information on the best available pharmacological tools, alongside key references and suggestions for further reading. The landscape format of the Concise Guide is designed to facilitate comparison of related targets from material contemporary to mid-2023, and supersedes data presented in the 2021/22, 2019/20, 2017/18, 2015/16 and 2013/14 Concise Guides and previous Guides to Receptors and Channels. It is produced in close conjunction with the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (NC-IUPHAR), therefore, providing official IUPHAR classification and nomenclature for human drug targets, where appropriate.</p

Chronic pancreatitis: Pediatric and adult cohorts show similarities in disease progress despite different risk factors

Objectives: To investigate the natural history of chronic pancreatitis (CP), patients in the North American Pancreatitis Study2 (NAPS2, adults) and INternational Study group of Pediatric Pancreatitis: In search for a cuRE (INSPPIRE, pediatric) were compared. Methods: Demographics, risk factors, disease duration, management and outcomes of 224 children and 1,063 adults were compared using appropriate statistical tests for categorical and continuous variables. Results: Alcohol was a risk in 53% of adults and 1% of children (p<0.0001); tobacco in 50% of adults and 7% of children (p<0.0001). Obstructive factors were more common in children (29% vs 19% in adults, p=0.001). Genetic risk factors were found more often in children. Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency was similar (children 26% vs adult 33%, p=0.107). Diabetes was more common in adults than children (36% vs 4% respectively, p<0.0001). Median emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and missed days of work/school were similar across the cohorts. As a secondary analysis, NAPS2 subjects with childhood onset (NAPS2-CO) were compared to INSPPIRE subjects. These two cohorts were more similar than the total INSPPIRE and NAPS2 cohorts, including for genetic risk factors. The only risk factor significantly more common in the NAPS2-CO cohort compared with the INSPPIRE cohort was alcohol (9% NAPS2-CO vs 1% INSPPIRE cohorts, p=0.011). Conclusions: Despite disparity in age of onset, children and adults with CP exhibit similarity in demographics, CP treatment, and pain. Differences between groups in radiographic findings and diabetes prevalence may be related to differences in risk factors associated with disease and length of time of CP