![]() |
|
|
Vol. 53, Issue 4, 759-765, April 1998
Department of Pharmacology (P.G.S, J.A.K., J.M.E.) and Glaxo Institute of Applied Pharmacology (J.A.K.), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1QJ, United Kingdom
| |
Summary |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The molecular mechanisms underlying the internalization of G protein-coupled receptors are still poorly understood. Normally agonists but not antagonists cause internalization (defined here as a reduction in the number of receptors at the cell surface), suggesting a functional relationship between agonist activity and internalization. In this study we investigated the effects of eight muscarinic ligands on the rate constants for endocytosis and recycling of m3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells. We found that there was a linear correlation between the intrinsic activity of the ligand and its ability to increase the rate constant for endocytosis, suggesting that the same active conformation of the receptor is responsible for stimulating both second messenger generation and receptor endocytosis. In contrast, the rate constant for recycling did not depend on which agonist had triggered receptor endocytosis, suggesting that recycling is a purely constitutive process. Because receptor internalization depends on the rate constants for both endocytosis and recycling, the relationship between internalization and intrinsic activity is nonlinear. In particular, mathematical modeling of receptor trafficking revealed that under certain conditions very small (3% or less) increases in the rate constant for endocytosis are sufficient to cause substantial receptor internalization. An important implication of this analysis is that extremely weak partial agonists (which may in practice be indistinguishable from antagonists) may produce significant receptor internalization.
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In unstimulated
cells, G protein-coupled receptors are found predominantly at the
plasma membrane. After agonist stimulation, the receptors are often
efficiently endocytosed and delivered to intracellular compartments,
from where they may be either recycled to the plasma membrane or
transported to lysosomes for degradation. In many cases, receptor
function has been shown to be regulated by this intracellular transport
(Pippig et al., 1995
; Bogatkewitsch et al.,
1996
), and so the unraveling of the mechanisms involved in receptor
endocytosis is crucial to our understanding of receptor function.
The molecular and cellular processes involved in receptor
endocytosis and recycling remain poorly understood. Normally,
agonists, but not antagonists, cause an increase in the rate of
endocytosis of receptors, suggesting that the activated conformation of
the receptor, which couples to G proteins, is also responsible for initiating receptor endocytosis. The involvement of G protein activation and second messenger generation in the triggering of endocytosis, however, remains controversial (Clark et al.,
1985
; Cheung et al., 1990
; Thompson et al., 1991
;
Benya et al., 1994
; Hunyady et al., 1994
).
Furthermore, studies of the relationship between the activity of
agonists and their ability to cause receptor internalization have
generated conflicting results. Indeed, it has recently been reported
that an antagonist at the cholecystokinin receptor can stimulate
internalization (Roettger et al., 1997
). Part of the problem
may relate to confusion of the terms "endocytosis," which refers to
the actual process of removal of receptors from the plasma membrane,
and the process that is often measured, internalization (the reduction
in number of receptors at the cell surface), which is a function of the
rate constants for both endocytosis and recycling (Koenig and
Edwardson, 1997
).
In the present study, we compared the ability of a series of
muscarinic ligands acting at m3 muscarinic receptors in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells (Wall et al., 1991
) to generate
second messenger and to modify receptor trafficking. Using a
two-compartment model for receptor trafficking (Koenig and Edwardson,
1994
), we analyzed the effects of these ligands on the kinetics of
receptor endocytosis and recycling. We demonstrate that there is a
linear relationship between the increase in the rate constant for
receptor endocytosis and the intrinsic activity of the ligand, but no
effect of the stimulating ligand on the rate constant for recycling. Furthermore, using mathematical simulations we show that the level of
internalization elicited by a drug is dependent not only on drug
efficacy, but also varies with cell type-specific factors, such as the
kinetics of receptor endocytosis and recycling. This analysis
demonstrates that, under certain conditions, compounds with extremely
low efficacy can cause significant receptor internalization.
| |
Experimental Procedures |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cell culture. SH-SY5Y cells (passage 5-25) were grown at 37° in Dulbecco's modification of Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum in 5% CO2/95% humidified air. Serum was heat-inactivated by incubation at 56° for 30 min. Cells were detached from the culture flasks for passaging every 3-5 days by brief (<2 min) incubation with trypsin (0.5 mg/ml) and EDTA (0.2 mg/ml) in phosphate-buffered saline.
Measurement of Ins(1,4,5)P3 mass.
Confluent
cultures of SH-SY5Y cells were harvested and reseeded at an equivalent
density in 24-well multidishes. After overnight incubation to allow
cell attachment, cells were washed twice with 250 µl of medium at
37° and left for 10 min at 37°. Experiments were initiated by the
removal of the wash buffer and its immediate replacement with 150 µl
of buffer with or without agonist. Incubations were terminated by the
addition of 150 µl of ice-cold 1 M trichloroacetic acid.
Multiwell plates were then put on ice for 15 min. A 160-µl aliquot of
the incubate was added to 40 µl of 10 mM EDTA, followed by 200 µl of a 1:1 (v/v) mixture of tri-n-octylamine and
1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane. After vortexing, the samples were left
at room temperature for 15 min and subsequently centrifuged at
13,000 × g for 3 min. The upper aqueous phase (100 µl) was taken, and 50 µl of 25 mM
NaHCO3 were added. Samples were then stored at
20° until assay of Ins(1,4,5)P3.
Determination of receptor binding affinities. The binding affinities of the muscarinic ligands were determined by the displacement of 0.25 nM [3H]-NMS in SH-SY5Y cells in Dulbecco's modification of Eagle's medium/HEPES buffer containing 0.5 M sucrose to block receptor internalization. Incubations were for 1 hr at 37°. Displacement curves were analyzed by EBDA/LIGAND (Elsevier Biosoft, Cambridge, UK) to obtain Hill slopes and binding affinities (Ki). The dissociation constant (Kd) for [3H]NMS was obtained under the same conditions as the agonist binding assays.
Analysis of receptor internalization.
Changes in surface
muscarinic receptor number were quantified through the binding of the
polar radioligand [3H]NMS to adherent SH-SY5Y
cells grown in 24-well plates, as described previously (Koenig and
Edwardson, 1996
). In experiments to determine the concentration
dependence of receptor internalization, curves were fitted to a
standard four-parameter logistic equation using SigmaPlot (SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, IL).
Mathematical modeling of receptor trafficking. In a two-compartment model, receptors cycle between the cell surface and endosomes. The rate of change of the number of surface receptors is given by the rate of receptors arriving by recycling less the rate leaving by endocytosis
|
(1) |
Rs, we can rewrite eq. 1 as
|
ay. This can be integrated to
ay
b = Ce
at, where
b = kr(Rs0 + Re0);
a = ke + kr and C is the constant
of integration. Rearrangement results in an equation describing the number of surface receptors as a function of time:
|
(2) |
|
(3) |
|
(4) |
Materials. [3H]Ins(1,4,5)P3 (43 Ci/mmol) was from Amersham (Buckinghamshire, UK) and [3H]NMS (85 Ci/mmol) was from DuPont-NEN (Stevenage, UK). Oxotremorine-M was from Research Biochemicals International (St. Albans, UK). McN-A-343 and propyl-benzilylcholine mustard (PrBCM) were generous gifts of Dr. J. M. Young (Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, UK). All other materials were from Sigma (Poole, UK).
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Intrinsic activity and potency of muscarinic ligands.
The
intrinsic activity and potency of the eight muscarinic ligands used in
this study were assayed through their ability to stimulate the
production of Ins(1,4,5)P3. Addition of
muscarinic agonists caused a biphasic
Ins(1,4,5)P3 response, with a rapid initial
increase that reached a peak 10 sec after addition of the drug,
followed by a reduction over the next 120 sec to a lower but sustained
phase (data not shown) (Willars and Nahorski, 1995
). Dose-response
curves measuring peak Ins(1,4,5)P3 responses were constructed for all eight muscarinic ligands (Fig.
1 and Table 1). Carbachol, methacholine, and
oxotremorine-M were all full agonists, whereas bethanechol, arecoline,
and pilocarpine were partial agonists, eliciting 51.6 ± 11.0%,
26.1 ± 3.9%, and 8.4 ± 1.2% of the maximal response to
carbachol, respectively. Both N-methylatropine and McN-A-343
were antagonists and without effect in this assay.
|
|
arecoline
pilocarpine)
bethanechol (Table 1). Comparison of
EC50 values with receptor affinities determined
by the displacement of [3H]NMS binding (Table
1) shows that, as expected, the dose-response curves for the full
agonists carbachol and oxotremorine-M lie 2-3-fold to the left of the
receptor occupancy curves and the dose-response curve for methacholine
overlies the receptor occupancy curve. In contrast, the dose-response
curves for the partial agonists bethanechol, arecoline, and pilocarpine
lie 2.9-, 9.5-, and 8.7-fold to the right of their respective
receptor-occupancy curves. At the moment, we cannot fully explain this
surprising behavior of the dose-response curves for the partial
agonists. One possibility is that the measurements of
Ins(1,4,5)P3 mass are being complicated by its
metabolism (by Ins(1,4,5)P3 5-phosphatase and/or
Ins(1,4,5)P3 3-kinase). It has recently been
shown that at least Ins(1,4,5)P3 3-kinase is
activated through a receptor-dependent mechanism (Communi et
al., 1997Measurement of muscarinic receptor recycling rates after removal of
agonist.
Upon agonist stimulation, muscarinic receptors are
internalized and cycle continuously between the cell surface and
intracellular compartments (Koenig and Edwardson, 1994
, 1996
). The
quantification of muscarinic receptor trafficking therefore requires
the determination of rate constants for both the endocytosis of
receptors from the plasma membrane
(ke) to an intracellular compartment
and their recycling to the cell surface
(kr). It is possible to measure the
rate of recycling of endocytosed receptors in isolation from the effect
of receptor endocytosis after removal of agonist, because in the
absence of agonist ke is so small
that it may be considered insignificant (Koenig and Edwardson, 1994
;
Morrison et al., 1996
). kr
was determined by treating cells with carbachol (1 mM; 30 min) to achieve maximal endocytosis
(Koenig and Edwardson, 1996
). Cells were then washed free of agonist
and exposed to the muscarinic receptor alkylating agent PrBCM (100 nM) to alkylate any receptors still remaining at
the cell surface. After removal of PrBCM, the rate of receptor
reinsertion into the plasma membrane was measured through the binding
of the polar radioligand [3H]NMS (Fig.
2 and Table
2). Modeling of these data using eq. 3 indicates that muscarinic receptors were recycled to the cell surface
with first order kinetics, giving a rate constant
(kr) of 0.054 ± 0.004 min
1.
|
|
Receptor endocytosis initiated by full and partial muscarinic
agonists.
To establish whether agonist intrinsic activity plays a
role in determining the rate of receptor endocytosis, we measured receptor internalization in response to increasing concentrations of
eight muscarinic ligands of varying intrinsic activity. Cells were
stimulated for 30 min with the appropriate agonist, after which time
receptor cycling to and from the plasma membrane has reached steady
state (data not shown) (Koenig and Edwardson, 1996
), and then
thoroughly washed before quantifying the amount of receptors left at
the cell surface (Fig. 3A and Table 1).
The full agonists carbachol, methacholine, and oxotremorine-M all
induced maximal receptor internalization, causing the loss of ~90%
of surface receptors to intracellular compartments at maximal
concentrations. Bethanechol, arecoline, and pilocarpine, which were
partial agonists in the Ins(1,4,5)P3 mass assays,
also exhibited partial agonism in internalization assays, causing the
maximal removal of 82.0 ± 0.6%, 78.4 ± 2.3%, and
18.7 ± 0.7%, respectively, of surface receptors at steady state,
whereas McN-A-343 and N-methylatropine were again without
effect. All agonists except the very weak partial agonist pilocarpine
caused internalization with EC50 values that were
significantly less than their Ki
values (Table 1), suggesting that maximal receptor internalization does
not require the presence of saturating concentrations of agonist.
|
methacholine
arecoline
pilocarpine)
bethanechol, which is the same as that seen for
Ins(1,4,5)P3 production.
|
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We have shown previously (Koenig and Edwardson, 1997
) that the
number of receptors internalized in response to agonist stimulation depends not only on the rate constant for endocytosis,
ke, but also on the rate constant for
recycling, kr. In the present study, we compared the abilities of various muscarinic ligands, ranging from
full agonists through partial agonists to antagonists, to stimulate
Ins(1,4,5)P3 production and receptor
internalization. Ins(1,4,5)P3 production was used
as an index of agonist intrinsic activity because this was considered
to be the parameter that would most closely reflect receptor
activation, being the first measurable point in the signal transduction
cascade in whole cells.
We analyzed the internalization data to dissect out the effects of the
ligands on ke and
kr, and found that the intrinsic activities of the ligands correlate directly with their ability to
increase ke. In contrast,
kr is independent of the ligand that caused the endocytosis. The constitutive nature of the recycling process is in agreement with a previous report that the recycling rate
of
2-adrenergic receptors is not affected by
the presence of agonist (Morrison et al., 1996
). It has also
been shown (Mayor et al., 1993
) that transferrin receptors
and membrane lipids pass through the endocytotic system with
indistinguishable kinetics, suggesting that recycling of membrane
proteins is the default pathway in the absence of specific lysosomal
sorting motifs.
To measure kr as accurately as possible, recycling was determined after alkylation of all receptors remaining at the surface with PrBCM at a relatively high concentration (100 nM). The extent of recycling observed under these conditions (approximately 25% of the number of receptors initially present at the surface) is much smaller than the loss of receptors from the surface in response to agonist stimulation (approximately 90%). In fact, the protocol used in this study results in an underestimation of the true extent of recycling, because PrBCM is apparently able to alkylate some internal receptors. Consequently, in these experiments we are underestimating the extent of recycling to measure kr accurately. If the PrBCM step is omitted, the extent of recycling is approximately 70% of the initial cell-surface value (Szekeres PG, Koenig JA, and Edwardson JM, unpublished observations). Even in the absence of the PrBCM treatment, therefore, recycling is incomplete. The shortfall cannot be accounted for by receptor degradation,1 indicating that some of the receptors are being translocated into a compartment from which they recycle very slowly or not at all. These findings suggest that a two-compartment model is an oversimplification, and we are currently developing a model that will more accurately reflect the real situation.
The correlation between intrinsic activity of the ligand and its effect
on ke extends the observations of a
previous study (Thompson and Fisher, 1990
), and strongly suggests that,
at least in this case, the same receptor conformation is responsible
for coupling to G proteins and stimulating endocytosis. Further
evidence for this concept comes from the identical potency profiles
observed for both production of Ins(1,4,5)P3 and
stimulation of the endocytotic rate constant,
ke. Usually, agonists but not
antagonists cause internalization of G protein-coupled receptors.
However, a recent report (Roettger et al., 1997
) indicated
that antagonists at the cholecystokinin receptor may also cause
receptor internalization, implying that different receptor
conformations are required to stimulate second messenger production and
endocytosis. Further evidence for separate receptor conformations has
been obtained from recent observations of the µ-opioid and
-opioid
receptors in transfected cells and enteric neurons (Sternini et
al., 1996
; Keith et al., 1996
), where enkephalins and
etorphine stimulate receptor endocytosis, but the full agonist morphine
does not. One interpretation of these results is that the opioid
receptors contain multiple agonist recognition domains (Wang et
al., 1995
; Kong et al., 1993
), leading to the
possibility of multiple activated conformations upon treatment with
different agonists. In contrast, muscarinic agonists are generally
thought to interact with a conserved agonist binding site (Hulme
et al., 1990
; Wess et al., 1991
). Our study
certainly provides no evidence for the involvement of separate receptor
conformations in initiating signal transduction and endocytosis of
muscarinic receptors.
Whether G protein activation and second messenger production are
themselves involved in triggering endocytosis is a question that has
been addressed by many groups. The most extensively studied G
protein-coupled receptor is the
2-adrenergic
receptor, which couples to Gs and activates
adenylyl cyclase. Because
2-adrenergic receptors are internalized in cells that do not express
Gs (Clark et al., 1985
) and mutant
2-adrenergic receptors that do not effectively couple to Gs are internalized to the same extent
as wild-type receptors (Cheung et al., 1990
), it is likely
that, at least for this receptor, G protein coupling and/or activation
is not a prerequisite for receptor internalization.
It has been reported previously that, in permeabilized SH-SY5Y cells,
both U-73122, an inhibitor of phospholipase C-dependent processes, and
guanosine-5'-O-(2-thiodiphosphate), which blocks G protein
activation, inhibit agonist-mediated muscarinic receptor internalization, but that omission of either ATP or
Ca2+, both of which are required for stimulation
of phosphoinositide hydrolysis, was without effect (Thompson et
al., 1991
; Slowiejko et al., 1994
). These results
indicate that G protein activation is required for internalization of
the m3 muscarinic receptor but that second messenger production is not.
Conflicting results have been obtained for other G protein-coupled
receptors. For example, Benya et al. (1994)
produced two
mutant gastrin-releasing peptide receptors and showed that one of these
mutant receptors maintained intact G protein coupling and showed a
robust internalization in response to agonist, whereas the other mutant
was no longer coupled to G protein and did not internalize, suggesting
a functional link between the two processes. On the other hand, the
coupling of the thyrotropin-releasing hormone receptor to the G protein Gq was not required for receptor internalization
(Petrou et al., 1997
), and there was no correlation between
G protein coupling and internalization in a series of mutants of the
angiotensin II receptor constructed by Hunyady et al.
(1994)
, suggesting that endocytosis of these receptors is independent
of G protein coupling. Finally, mutant muscarinic receptors have been
constructed that show impaired internalization but normal G protein
coupling (Moro et al., 1993
). Overall, the results of the
above studies leave us with the possibility that there is no general
rule governing the behavior of all members of the G protein-coupled
receptor superfamily, and that the determinants of internalization may depend on both receptor type and cell type. One potentially confusing factor, which is never addressed in studies based upon receptor mutagenesis, is that the mutant receptors may have altered recycling rates. This may cause apparent differences in their internalization properties, because the number of receptors internalized will depend on
both the rates of endocytosis and recycling. The results of these
studies, therefore, need to be interpreted with some caution.
An important implication of our results is that the removal of
receptors from the plasma membrane is not a linear function of
ke, and in addition will depend on
both kr and
ke(max), parameters that are cell
type-specific (Koenig and Edwardson, 1996
). Furthermore, agonist
regulation of ke, but not
kr, provides a means by which very
weak stimulation of the receptor can result in substantial internalization. In the simulations shown here (Fig. 5), we consider the effects of a partial agonist, which possesses only 3% of the intrinsic activity of a full agonist. In our view, the detection of
such a low level of agonist activity would be unlikely in most second
messenger assays, and therefore this compound could easily be
classified as an antagonist. Our analysis shows that when
ke and
kr are varied over a range often seen
for G protein-coupled receptors in mammalian cells (Koenig and
Edwardson, 1994
, 1996
; Barak et al., 1995
; Pippig et
al., 1995
; Morrison et al., 1996
), significant
internalization of receptors can be achieved with a maximal dose of
drug, under conditions where either
kr is low or
ke(max) is high, or both. Such values
for the rate constants would give rise to a system where stimulation
with a full agonist results in rapid internalization of a large
proportion of surface receptors. It is interesting to note that in the
one published example of antagonist-induced receptor internalization
(Roettger et al., 1997
), full agonist occupation of the same
receptor gave rise to a rapid internalization of 90% of the receptors,
whereas antagonist caused the internalization of only 37% of
receptors. Thus, the amplification effect of small agonist-induced
increases in ke producing large
amounts of receptor internalization may provide an alternative
explanation of apparent antagonist-triggered receptor internalization.
Our results also raise the possibility that cells which have a low
value of kr and a high value of
ke(max) for a particular receptor
type might provide a useful system in which to use receptor
internalization to detect weak partial agonist activity.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank Andy Letcher (Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK) for the generous gift of the porcine platelet membrane preparation and Dr. J. M. Young for providing us with PrBCM and McN-A-343. The expert technical assistance of Diane Hall is gratefully acknowledged. J.A.K. thanks Prof. P. P. A. Humphrey, the Glaxo Institute for Applied Pharmacology, and Magdalene College, Cambridge, for their support.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Received October 22, 1997; Accepted December 11, 1997
This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust.
Send reprint requests to: Dr. J. M. Edwardson, Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1QJ, UK. E-mail: jme1000{at}cus.cam.ac.uk
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
Ins(1, 4,5)P3, D-myo-inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate; ke, rate constant for receptor endocytosis; kr, rate constant for receptor recycling; NMS, N-methylscopolamine; PrBCM, propyl-benzilylcholine mustard; HEPES, 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2-adrenergic receptor.
Biochemistry
34:
15407-15414[Medline].
-adrenergic receptor.
Mol Pharmacol
37:
775-779[Abstract].
-adrenergic receptor in cultured S49 WT and cyc
lymphoma cells.
J Cyclic Nucleotide Protein Phosphorylation Res
10:
97-119[Medline].
opioid receptor specifies selective high affinity agonist binding.
J Biol Chem
268:
23055-23058
2-adrenergic receptor during agonist-induced steady state redistribution.
Mol Pharmacol
50:
692-699[Abstract].
2-adrenergic receptors permit receptor resensitization.
Mol Pharmacol
47:
666-676[Abstract].
opioid receptor selectivity utilizing chimeric and site-mutagenized receptors.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
92:
12436-12440This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. T. Jensen, J. F. Battey, E. R. Spindel, and R. V. Benya International Union of Pharmacology. LXVIII. Mammalian Bombesin Receptors: Nomenclature, Distribution, Pharmacology, Signaling, and Functions in Normal and Disease States Pharmacol. Rev., March 1, 2008; 60(1): 1 - 42. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Q. Liu, R. Cescato, D. A. Dewi, J. Rivier, J.-C. Reubi, and A. Schonbrunn Receptor Signaling and Endocytosis Are Differentially Regulated by Somatostatin Analogs Mol. Pharmacol., July 1, 2005; 68(1): 90 - 101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Thielemans, I. Depoortere, J. Perret, P. Robberecht, Y. Liu, T. Thijs, C. Carreras, E. Burgeon, and T. L. Peeters Desensitization of the Human Motilin Receptor by Motilides J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., June 1, 2005; 313(3): 1397 - 1405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. P. Morris, R. R. Price, M. P. Smith, B. Lei, and D. A. Schwinn Cellular Trafficking of Human {alpha}1a-Adrenergic Receptors Is Continuous and Primarily Agonist-Independent Mol. Pharmacol., October 1, 2004; 66(4): 843 - 854. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. L. Borgland, M. Connor, P. B. Osborne, J. B. Furness, and M. J. Christie Opioid Agonists Have Different Efficacy Profiles for G Protein Activation, Rapid Desensitization, and Endocytosis of Mu-opioid Receptors J. Biol. Chem., May 23, 2003; 278(21): 18776 - 18784. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Sun and M. C. Gershengorn Correlation between Basal Signaling and Internalization of Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone Receptors: Evidence for Involvement of Similar Receptor Conformations Endocrinology, August 1, 2002; 143(8): 2886 - 2892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. R. Price, D. P. Morris, G. Biswas, M. P. Smith, and D. A. Schwinn Acute Agonist-mediated Desensitization of the Human alpha 1a-Adrenergic Receptor Is Primarily Independent of Carboxyl Terminus Regulation. IMPLICATIONS FOR REGULATION OF alpha 1aAR SPLICE VARIANTS J. Biol. Chem., March 8, 2002; 277(11): 9570 - 9579. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Chavkin, J. P. McLaughlin, and J. P. Celver Regulation of Opioid Receptor Function by Chronic Agonist Exposure: Constitutive Activity and Desensitization Mol. Pharmacol., July 1, 2001; 60(1): 20 - 25. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
P. A. Zaki, D. E. Keith Jr., G. A. Brine, F. I. Carroll, and C. J. Evans Ligand-Induced Changes in Surface {micro}-Opioid Receptor Number: Relationship to G Protein Activation? J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., March 1, 2000; 292(3): 1127 - 1134. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
K.-S. Min, X. Liu, J. Fabritz, J. Jaquette, A. N. Abell, and M. Ascoli Mutations That Induce Constitutive Activation and Mutations That Impair Signal Transduction Modulate the Basal and/or Agonist-stimulated Internalization of the Lutropin/Choriogonadotropin Receptor J. Biol. Chem., December 25, 1998; 273(52): 34911 - 34919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-P. Vilardaga, M. Frank, C. Krasel, C. Dees, R. A. Nissenson, and M. J. Lohse Differential Conformational Requirements for Activation of G Proteins and the Regulatory Proteins Arrestin and G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinase in the G Protein-coupled Receptor for Parathyroid Hormone (PTH)/PTH-related Protein J. Biol. Chem., August 31, 2001; 276(36): 33435 - 33443. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||