Department of Pharmacology, Istituto Superiore di Sanità,
Rome, Italy (C.A., P.M., T.C.); and the Institut de Pharmacologie et
Toxicologie, Université de Lausanne, Faculté de
Médecine, Lausanne, Switzerland (S.C.)
The binding free energy for the interaction between serines 204 and 207 of the fifth transmembrane helix of the
2-adrenergic receptor (
2-AR) and catecholic hydroxyl (OH) groups of
adrenergic agonists was analyzed using double mutant cycles. Binding
affinities for catecholic and noncatecholic agonists were measured in
wild-type and mutant receptors, carrying alanine replacement of the two serines (S204A, S207A
2-AR), a constitutive activating
mutation, or both. The free energy coupling between the losses of
binding energy attributable to OH deletion from the ligand and from the receptor indicates a strong interaction (nonadditivity) as expected for
a direct binding between the two sets of groups. However, we also
measured a significant interaction between the deletion of OH groups
from the receptor and the constitutive activating mutation. This
suggests that a fraction of the decrease in agonist affinity caused by
serine mutagenesis may involve a shift in the conformational
equilibrium of the receptor toward the inactive state. Direct
measurements using a transient transfection assay confirm this
prediction. The constitutive activity of the (S204A, S207A)
2-AR mutant is 50 to 60% lower than that of the
wild-type
2-AR. We conclude that S204 and S207 do not
only provide a docking site for the agonist, but also control the
equilibrium of the receptor between active (R*) and inactive
(R) forms.
 |
Introduction |
The
phenomenon of agonist-mediated activation of a G protein-coupled
receptor (i.e., seven transmembrane domain, or 7TM, receptors) can be
described conveniently through the formalism of a two-state allosteric
transition. The receptor exists in equilibrium between the active and
inactive conformations, R and R*. In the absence
of a bound agonist, constraints (that are structural in nature,
perhaps) maintain the equilibrium shifted toward the inactive form,
thus, little or no ligand-independent signaling occurs. Agonist
binding, but also, remarkably, some mutations that cause constitutive
activity (Kjelsberg et al., 1992
; Parma et al., 1993
; Samama et al.,
1993
; Shenker et al., 1993
; Scheer et al., 1996
, 1997
), remove such
constraints and make the active receptor form R*
predominant. Consequently, the free energy change that we measure for
the agonist-binding process (e.g., as equilibrium affinity) must
reflect at least two contributions. One is the total sum of energies
related to the intermolecular forces that hold ligands and receptors
together. The other results from the perturbation of intramolecular
forces that the bound receptor endures in the transition to the
bioactive form. Both make up experimentally measured ligand binding
constants. Mutations that alter ligand affinity, therefore, can do so
by changing either component, or both. How to dissect or measure each contribution?
We sought to present this question to the case of
2-adrenergic receptors
(
2-AR), where a number of sites that are
crucial for agonist binding were identified early in a series of
ingenious mutagenesis studies (Strader et al., 1987
, 1988
, 1989
). One
fundamental interaction in the binding of catecholamine agonists
(Strader et al., 1989
) is considered to be hydrogen bonding between
catecholic hydroxyl groups and two serine residues (S204 and S207 for
human
2-AR) located in the fifth putative
transmembrane domain (TM5). The position of such residues, especially
that of S207, is highly conserved among all members of the
catecholamine receptor family, and their modification by site-directed
mutagenesis decreases agonist-, but not antagonist-, binding affinity
in all types of catecholamine receptors (Wang et al., 1991
; Link et
al., 1992
; Cavalli et al., 1996
; Hwa and Perez, 1996
).
The magnitude of binding energy that is lost to elimination of each
serine residue was consistent with what may be expected for the
deletion of one hydrogen bond (Strader et al., 1989
). However, the
modification of S204 and S207 in
-adrenergic receptors also causes
impairment of agonist-mediated signal transduction (Strader et al.,
1989
), suggesting that the interaction between the catechol ring and
TM5 is involved in the process of coupling ligand recognition to the
emergence of the bioactive conformation in the receptor. Therefore,
part of that lost binding energy may also reflect the reduced tendency
of the receptor to interconvert into R* form.
In this study, we exploit the principle of energy conservation among
simultaneous perturbations applied to a macromolecule binding process
(Horovitz, 1987
; Horovitz and Fersht, 1990
; Hidalgo and
MacKinnon, 1995
; Faiman and Horovitz, 1996
) to analyze the loss of
agonist binding energy that follows the double deletion of S204 and
S207 in the human
2-AR.
Using this approach, we estimate that a fraction of the
mutation-induced change of binding energy that follows the removal of
hydroxyl groups is attributable to a shift of the intramolecular equilibrium of the receptor toward the inactive state. Consistent with
such measurements, we also find that the mutant receptor displays a
significant reduction of ligand-independent activity compared with the
wild type, indicating that serine deletion can cause some degree of
constitutive inactivation of the receptor.
These data demonstrate that a contact region that is involved in
agonist-induced activation of the receptor also controls the
equilibrium between active and inactive receptor forms.
 |
Materials and Methods |
Receptor Mutagenesis.
The cDNA encoding the human
2-AR subcloned in pTZ (Pharmacia, Uppsala,
Sweden) was mutated by polymerase chain reaction, using Taq
DNA polymerase. Recombinant clones were isolated and sequenced. The
mutated DNA fragment was digested with NcoI and BglII and cloned into the expression vector pBC12BI
containing the cDNA encoding the wild-type
2-AR or its constitutively active mutant (cam)
(Samama et al., 1993
).
Cell Culture and Transfections.
COS-7 cells were grown in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (high glucose) supplemented with
10% fetal calf serum, 100 U/ml penicillin G, and 100 µg/ml
streptomycin sulfate, in a humidified atmosphere of 5%
CO2 at 37°C. Cells were plated in 80- or
25-cm2 flasks and transfected transiently with
plasmids (pBC12BI or pcDNA3) harboring either wild-type or mutant
receptor cDNA using the DEAE-dextrane/chloroquine procedure (Cotecchia
et al., 1990
). Gradual levels of receptor expression were obtained by
transfecting varying amounts of receptor cDNA with the total mass of
input DNA (0.2 µg/cm2/0.1 ml) maintained
constant through the addition of empty vector. Cells were harvested
48 h after transfection for the binding assay or plated 24 h
after transfection in 24-well plates, and then grown for an additional
24 h before the determination of cAMP levels. For the generation
of stably expressing clonal lines, Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells
were grown in a 1:1 mixture of Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium and
Ham's F-12 medium. Cells were transfected using Lipofectin (Life
Technologies, Paisley, Scotland) according to the
manufacturer's instructions. Clones (30-40 for each transfected
plasmid) resistant to Geneticin (400 µg/ml of active drug; Life
Technologies) were isolated and tested for their ability to bind
125I- pindolol (NEN Life Science Products,
Boston, MA).
cAMP Determination in Intact Cells.
For determination of
basal levels of cAMP, COS-7 cells were seeded in 24-well plates. After
aspiration of the medium, the cells were incubated in a buffer
containing: 135 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, 1.5 mM
KH2PO4, 20 mM NaHEPES, 2 mM
CaCl2, 1.2 mM MgSO4 , 1 mM
EGTA, 11.1 mM D-glucose, 0.01 mM Rolipram, and 0.05% BSA, pH 7.4. Incubations lasted 20 min at 37°C and were arrested by the
removal of the buffer and the addition of 0.5 ml of ice-cold 0.1 N HCl
to each well. Plates were placed on ice, and an aliquot of the HCl
extract was removed for the determination of cAMP concentration using
radioimmunoassay, as described (Vachon et al., 1987
).
Adenylate Cyclase Assays.
Membranes from frozen transfected
cells were prepared as described previously (Vachon et al., 1987
) and
stored at
80°C (protein concentration 1-2 mg/ml) until used. The
adenylyl cyclase reaction mix included 50 mM Tris/HEPES, 10 mM
MgSO4, 0.5 mM ATP, 100 µM GTP, 5 mM
phosphocreatine, 25 mM creatine phosphokinase, 150 mM NaCl (pH 7.5),
and 10 µM Rolipram, in a final volume of 100 µl. Reactions were
started by the addition of the membrane suspensions (2-5 µg of
protein) and arrested after 10 min at 37°C by the addition of 0.1 ml
of ice-cold 0.2 M HCl. The determination of cAMP formed was performed
using radioimmunoassay.
Binding Assay in Membrane Preparations and Intact Cells.
The
binding of 125I-pindolol was measured in 1 ml of
50 mM Tris-HCl and 0.1 mM EGTA (pH 7.4) for 90 min at room temperature
using 0.1-10 µg of membrane proteins. The concentration of
radiotracer was maintained constant at 10 pM in the presence of
increasing concentration of unlabeled ligands. Reactions were
terminated by rapid filtration onto GF/B glass fiber filtering
microplates (Filtermate 196; Packard Instruments, Meriden, CT).
Filters were washed three times in 1 ml of ice-cold 50 mM Tris-HCl pH
7.4 and allowed to dry for a few hours. The plates were counted in a
Top Count (Packard Instruments) after the addition (25 µl) of
Microscint 20 (Packard) to each well. To measure binding in intact
cells, transfected COS-7 cells were seeded 24 h after transfection
in opaque culture plates (Packard Instruments) and incubated the next
day in a reaction buffer with a composition identical with that used
for determination of cAMP in intact cells. The reaction mixture (1 ml)
contained either 125I-pindolol (20 pM) or
[3H]CGP 12177 (0.5 nM; NEN Life Science
Products) and increasing concentration of cold ligands. The incubation
lasted 90 min at 4°C and was terminated by rapid aspiration of the
incubation buffer, followed by washing the monolayer twice in ice-cold
PBS. After draining plates overnight onto filter paper, 250 µl
of Microscint 20 was added to each well and the plates were counted in
a Top Count.
Data Analysis and Calculations.
Equilibrium dissociation
(Kd) and association
(Keq = 1/Kd) constants were calculated by
nonlinear fitting of the binding curves to a four-parameter logistic
equation using the program ALLFIT (DeLean et al., 1978
). When required,
the binding affinity was also estimated with the computer
program LIGAND (Munson and Rodbard, 1980
). Free energy changes, except
when indicated otherwise, are given in RT units
(R, gas constant, T, absolute temperature) i.e.:
G =
ln(1/Kd).
Energy calculations (i.e., differences from wild type and sums of
single mutations) were computed experiment by experiment before taking
their averages, thus their variances reflect mostly true experimental
variance and not accumulating errors that propagate when multiple
calculations are applied to averaged affinity values. Similarly,
statistics for 
G and free energy coupling values (
G) were
computed for the repeated measurements after converting data into free
energy in each experiment. The variation of free energy attributable to
mutation (
G) is the difference in binding energy between mutant
and wild-type receptor, i.e., 
G =
G(mut)
G(wt). For a double-mutant cycle consisting of single mutations 1 and 2, and the double mutation (1,2), the free energy coupling can be
computed as:
G1,2 =
G(1,2) +
G(wt)
[
G(1) +
G(2)]. The theoretical background for
these calculations is given below.
Theoretical Background.
First we recall the meaning of
apparent binding energy as derived from an experimentally measured
equilibrium binding constant in an allosteric protein. Next, we will
examine its implications in the analysis of multiple mutations cycles.
Apparent Binding Energy for an Allosteric Receptor.
Let us
assume that a receptor (R) can exists in a large
number (n) of interconvertible conformational states (Onaran
and Costa, 1997
). The transitions among all of them at equilibrium can
be expressed with respect to an arbitrarily chosen reference state (s0). The concentration of each
individual state ([si]), (with i
0), is then given by a first-order equilibrium
constant (j), such that ji = [si]/[s0].
Thus, [R] = [s0](1 +
i=1n ji).
If the receptor binds a ligand (H), the stability of each individual state in the bound receptor form will be perturbed by a
factor (b), such that bi = [Hsi][s0]/[Hs0][si].
Hence, the concentration of bound receptor is [HR] = [Hs0](1 +
i=1n biji),
and the apparent second-order equilibrium affinity constant (Onaran and
Costa, 1997
) can be expressed as:
|
(1)
|
Here, k0 is the microscopic
second-order binding constant that would be measured if all the
molecules of the receptor could exist "frozen" in only
one of the possible conformational states (s0), and the fractional term is the
rearrangement of the first-order state transitions equilibria as the
receptor passes from the unbound to the bound form. The corresponding
experimentally measured binding energy, [i.e.,
RT
ln(Kapp)], thus can be approximated
as the sum of two components:
|
(2)
|
where B can be interpreted as the binding
contribution resulting from the intermolecular interactions between
ligand and receptor contact sites
(ko), and Cb
Cf is the conformational contribution
attributable to "displacement" of intramolecular equilibria of the
receptor, i.e., the difference in intramolecular interactions between
bound and free receptor forms (the fractional term in eq. 4). We might
obviously derive a similar relation from the ligand side, but if the
ligand is a small molecule, its conformational space will be vastly
limited compared with that of the receptor and can be ignored in many cases.
A mutation can change binding energy by affecting any one of the
components or all. Therefore, an equivalent decrease of binding affinity caused by the deletion of a residue can result from three distinct, but indistinguishable, mechanisms: 1) the side chain of the
mutated residue provides a docking site for the ligand and has little
or no role on the conformational equilibria of the receptor
(primary change of B); 2) conversely, the
residue has no direct contact with the ligands but exerts a key role on intramolecular receptor motion before or after the binding of ligand
(changes of Cb and/or Cf); or 3) a combinations
of both mechanisms. It is also evident that there might be
compensation between opposing effects when the two components are
changed into inverse directions. Thus, even if mutagenesis of a residue
produces minor or no change on binding affinity, we cannot rule out its role in the process of binding and activation of the receptor.
Free Energy Conservation for Alchemical Reaction Paths.
Whether additivity principles (i.e., the idea that several
subconstituents of a system contribute linearly to its macroscopic behavior) can be used to dissect the components of free energy changes
in proteins is a matter of heated theoretical debate (Boresch and
Karplus, 1994
; Mark and van Gusteren, 1994
) and unresolved questions
(Dill, 1997
). However, the existence of free energy conservation among
chemical (Weber, 1972
, 1973
) or alchemical (Horovitz and Fersht, 1990
)
perturbations applied to a macromolecule stands as a valid principle to
analyze the presence or the lack of additivity in biomolecular
interactions. The use of this strategy to study the effect of
chemically or genetically engineered mutations was explained and
discussed elsewhere (Horovitz, 1987
; Horovitz and Fersht, 1990
; Hidalgo
and MacKinnon, 1995
; Faiman and Horovitz, 1996
). For convenience, we
will summarize only briefly the key principles.
Consider a set of experimental measurements of the free energy of
binding for a ligand-receptor interaction before and after either the
single or the concurrent application of two nonidentical perturbations
to the system. The effects on binding energy produced by the two
perturbations obey the principle of free energy conservation and allow
us to draw the following thermodynamic reaction
cycle:
where
Gs indicate free energy changes truly measured by
experiment, and 
Gs depict alchemical free energy changes, because they are not measured directly, but inferred from the computed differences in
Gs.
The overall free energy change for the transition from the unchanged
state (in which no perturbation is yet present) to the final state (in
which both have been applied) is path-independent. Thus:
|
(3)
|
Each pair of opposite paths indicates the same kind of change,
which is applied either before [
G(1) or 
G(2)] and when (
G(1 2) or 
G(2 1)) the second change is also present.
From eq. 3, it follows that the differences between such diametric paths are equal, i.e.:
|
(4)
|
If we call
G1,2 this constant
difference, it is clear from eqs. 3 and 4 that:
|
(5)
|
This relation tells that the term
G1,2
is the coupling free energy (Weber, 1972
, 1973
; Horovitz, 1987
) between
the effects of the two perturbations. When
G1,2 = 0, 
G(1) + 
G(2) = 
G(T), it means that the two effects on binding energy are
perfectly additive and thus act independently of each other. In
contrast,
G1,2
0 implies interaction (lack
of additivity) between the perturbations, and its magnitude states to
what extent the two effects are coupled. The sign of the coupling
energy also indicates the type of cooperativity existing between the
effects. By established convention, a negative
G1,2 means stabilization and thus positive cooperativity, and vice versa in the other case.
Perturbation is meant in a general sense. It can be a covalent
modification of either partners of a binding process, or the transfer
to a different environment, or any sort of natural or unnatural
mutations of the receptor. Similarly, general is the meaning of
nonequivalence of the perturbations, because it is satisfied by either
a diversity of location (e.g., an identical change applied to the
ligand and the receptor or to distinct sites within the receptor) or a
difference in the type of imparted change.
Free Energy Coupling between Alchemical Changes in an Allosteric
Receptor.
We examined how this strategy can be used to analyze
apparent free energy changes at allosteric receptors. Let's consider two specific examples that are relevant to the work described in this study.
Deletions of Chemically Complementary Groups from the Ligand and
the Receptor.
A set of complementary chemical groups are deleted
from both the ligand and the receptor. Even if the two deletions
produce similar or identical losses of binding energy, we cannot
conclude that the two groups interact with each other in the
ligand-receptor complex. In fact, the ligand group may interact
elsewhere in the receptor, whereas the receptor group could be engaged
in a network of intramolecular interactions that are crucial to the
binding process. In terms of eq. 2, the decrease of binding energy
attributable to the ligand deletion results from a primary effect on
B, whereas that attributable to the receptor deletion comes
from conformational contributions. Thus, the losses of binding
energy can have the same magnitude even if the deleted groups do not
interact with one another.
In principle, the construction of a thermodynamic cycle as in Scheme 1 and the calculation of the magnitude of free energy coupling
(
G1,2) may provide a way of discrimination.
The logic of interpretation is simple. If the groups interact directly, removing any of the two from either ligand or receptor should not
produce more effect than removing both. Therefore, 
G(1|2)

G(2|1)
0, and 
G(1)

G(2)
G1,2. This means strong interaction
and, therefore, a total lack of additivity between the effects of the
two deletions. Conversely, if the interaction is mediated indirectly
through conformation: 
G(1)

G(1|2), 
G(2)

G(2|1), and
G1,2
0. This means total lack of interaction and perfect additivity of
the effects.
In practice, however, such "clear-cut" results are unrealistic and
not likely encountered frequently in proteins such as receptors, in
which binding and conformational change are linked inextricably. The
question then is how large or small should the magnitude of coupling
be, to suggest, respectively, interaction or lack of interaction. To
answer, we will examine how intermolecular and intramolecular
contributions to apparent binding energy can be affected differentially
by perturbations and what the expected output in the analysis via
thermodynamic cycles may be. Let's call "docking" and
"conformational" the two types of contributions in eq. 2, and set 1 and 2 the deletion from receptor or ligand, respectively. The
alchemical energy differences caused by the mutations can be written in
terms of probable docking (B') or conformational (C'b and C'f)
components that add up to the overall binding energy as a consequence
of each perturbation.
Indirect Interactions.
A receptor mutation that does not hit
a docking site can decrease binding energy by turning into a
destabilizing contribution the intramolecular equilibria that control
bound and free receptor forms. If so, the effect of perturbation 1 is:

G(1) = C'b + C'f. When the mutation in the ligand instead
suppresses a contact group, both docking and conformational
contributions that are attributable to that group are affected. Thus,

G(2) = B' + C''b. If the receptor change does not
disturb the conformational contribution of the ligand change (i.e., C'b
and C''b are independent), the total difference is:

G(T) = B' + C'b + C'f + C''b, and
G1,2
0, (eq. 5). The effects are truly
additive. However, if the conformational change caused by the receptor
mutation mimics or cancels that from the loss of the ligand bond,
ligand and receptor mutations may share a conformational contribution.
Thus: 
G(1) = C'b + C'f + C''b. The resulting
G1,2 will not be zero, but
C''b, and
the analysis reveals that the effects are not perfectly additive, but
show a small degree of interaction. How small should
G1,2 be to decide that the effects are
predominantly additive? Because it is likely that C''b

G(1) and C''b < 
G(2), then the magnitude of
G1,2 should be smaller than either changes
attributable to each individual perturbation. Therefore, we may state
in general that if free energy coupling is close to zero or
significantly smaller than the individual changes produced by each
single perturbation, we should discard the hypothesis that the
groups deleted from the receptor and from the ligand form a direct bond.
Direct Interaction.
When mutations in both ligand and
receptor suppress groups that bind to one another, the perturbations
will share an identical "loss" of docking contribution and most
likely also a similar conformational contribution that each group has
on binding energy. If so, 
G(1)

G(2) = B' + C'b; 
G(1|2)

G(2|1)
0 and
G1,2
(B' + C'b), which means strong
interaction and total lack of additivity.
Under such conditions,
G1,2 is a reliable
measure of the overall strength of interaction between the groups.
However, there may be situations in which the binding of mutated ligand
to mutated receptor is different from the binding of either of the two
mutated molecules to the unmodified partner. For example, let's
imagine a case in which mutated ligand binds to mutated receptor
slightly better than to the wild type, because the simultaneous
deletion of the pair of interacting groups from both ligand and
receptor favors somewhat all the interactions at the other points of
contact between the two molecules. Calling this extrainteraction C''b, 
G(1|2)

G(2|1)
C''b, and
G1,2 = C''b
(B'' + C''b). Thus, depending on the sign of C''b,
G1,2
may be smaller or greater than B' + C'b. Therefore, we can say in
general that in case of direct interaction, the size of free energy
coupling is comparable (even if not necessarily identical) to

G(1) or 
G(2), and it will approach the actual value of
(B' + C'b) as closer 
G(1|2) and 
G(2|1) tend to zero.
Direct Interaction with Additive Components.
The situation
is identical with that of case 2, but the mutation of the receptor also
affects the intramolecular equilibria of the "vacant" protein. In
this case, 
G(1) = B'+ C'b + C'f; 
G(2) = B' + C'b;

G(T) = B' + C'b + C'f; and
G1,2 =
(B' + C'b), which is exactly the same result of case 2. In fact, the contribution of the additive component will cancel out and does not
disturb the detection of the strong interaction caused by the removal
of complementary groups. A significant difference between 
G(1)
and 
G(2) is the sole, but very important, clue to suspect a role
of the intramolecular equilibria of the empty receptor. In general, a
strong interaction evidenced by
G1,2
0, with 
G(1) > 
G(2) suggests that the mutation in the
receptor not only suppress the docking point for the ligand, but also
changes binding energy by affecting intramolecular equilibria in the
receptor itself.
Mutations in Two Separated Domains of the Receptor.
The
principle of analysis is identical with that detailed above, but the
implications of presence of interaction or lack of interaction are
quite different. If two mutations applied to distant sites of the same
receptor affect the energy of binding for a ligand in a nonadditive
manner, that means that the two mutated sites are coupled through
propagated intramolecular interactions in regulating the reactivity of
the receptor binding site for that ligand (Horovitz, 1987
; Horowitz and
Fersht, 1990
). Using this strategy thus is possible to map
conformational "sensitive" residues in the ligand binding site. For
example, suppose we know that a residue of the receptor is located in
the ligand binding pocket and that mutation of a second far-apart
residue of the molecule (which we can assume is not accessible
to the ligand) affects ligand affinity, presumably via a conformational
change. Let's call 1 and 2 the mutations of the first and second
residue, respectively. If, by constructing a double-mutant
thermodynamic cycle, the effect of the two mutations are additive (not
coupled), then the change of binding energy induced by mutating the
binding residue 1 does not involve any conformational contribution
common to that induced by the mutation of the second residue. On the contrary, if there is interaction (lack of additivity), it means that
the two mutations share a common conformational mechanism in changing
binding affinity.
If we place mutation 1 in the ligand binding pocket and mutation 2 in
the G protein-binding area, this strategy could map which residues of
the 7TM molecule are important for the transmission of conformational
influences between the two binding domains.
 |
Results |
Lack of Additivity between Single and Double Substitutions of S204
and S207.
Strader et al. (1989)
proposed that serines 204 and 207 in TM5 of
2-AR may act as hydrogen bond donors
for the attraction of the two hydroxyl groups of the catechol moiety of
adrenergic agonists. In their study (Strader et al., 1989
), as well as
others (Kikkawa et al., 1997
, 1998
), site-directed mutagenesis studies, single-substitutions of either S204 or S207 were examined. Each single
replacement caused roughly similar decreases of agonist binding energy,
which supports the idea that two hydrogen bonds may be formed between
meta and para hydroxyl groups of the ligand and
the serine side chains of the receptor (Strader et al., 1989
). It was
not known, however, whether the effects of the two deletions were
additive, as it may have been expected if the diminution of binding
energy would primarily reflect the loss of stabilizing effect
attributable to the individual bonds removed by each mutation.
To answer this question, we prepared alanine mutants of the human
receptor where either each of the two serines (S204A
2-AR and S207A
2-AR)
or both (S204A, S207A
2-AR) were substituted. Wild-type and mutant receptors were compared after transfection in
COS-7 cells, by measuring the binding affinity of the agonist (
)isoproterenol and the antagonist (
)pindolol in competition isotherms for the sites labeled by 125I-pindolol.
In agreement with previous findings, serine replacement in each site of
TM5 produced similar diminution of agonist affinity (Table
1). In contrast, no significant changes
of pindolol binding affinity in comparison with the wild type were
observed in either single- or double-mutated receptors (data not
shown), indicating that the observed responses are agonist-specific in
all cases. The 20- and 12-fold decrease in agonist binding affinity
observed for S204A and S207A, respectively, correspond to a
mutation-induced destabilization of +7.9 and +6.5 kJ/mol in the free
energy change caused by isoproterenol binding. However, the double
mutation S204A, S207A produced a decrease of affinity corresponding to 10.2 kJ/mol of binding energy. Thus, the removal of both hydroxyl side
chains exerts a smaller effect than the sum of those attributable to
each single deletion.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1
Comparison of agonist binding affinity for single and double mutations
of serines 204 and 207 in TM5 of 2AR
Binding parameters for isoproterenol in competition for
125I-pindolol were estimated using LIGAND (Munson and Rodbard,
1980 ). In all cases, curves were fitted satisfactorily assuming a
single class of binding sites. Mutation change is the net change of
agonist binding energy caused by the mutations, calculated as
 G = Gwt Gmut. The data are the
means of four independent experiments in each of which the binding to
the wild-type receptor and all six mutants was measured in parallel.
Statistics on free energy data were computed after calculating for each
experiment the mutation changes and the expected sum of the single
mutations. The significance of the differences between the sum expected
from single mutants (col. 5) and the energy measured for double mutants
(col. 4) was evaluated using t-statistics (paired two-tailed
t-tests).
|
|
Although the mutation of a residue into alanine most closely mimics the
pure deletion of the side chain (Faiman and Horovitz, 1996
), increasing
the abundance of alanines in a transmembrane helix may also affect its
orientation and overall conformation. To verify whether the nonadditive
pattern may depend on the chemical nature of the chosen residues, we
also prepared corresponding
2-AR mutants in
which the same serines were replaced by cysteine. Serine and cysteine
have side chains of equivalent length, but SH groups are poorer
hydrogen bond donors or acceptors than hydroxyl ones. As shown in Table
1, the results observed with such mutants perfectly overlap those
obtained with alanine mutants, indicating that in either cases is the
removal of hydroxyl groups responsible for the measured losses of
binding energy, regardless of the residue used for replacement.
The lack of additivity shown here is not surprising, for hydrogen bonds
cannot be removed without also affecting additional factors, such as
basicity, dipole moment, repulsion and conformation (Perrin and
Nielson, 1997
). Thus, energetic contributions of individual hydrogen
bonds deduced through deletion in proteins can only be taken as
upper-limit estimates. We suspected, however, that the conformational
contribution in this case should be worth of additional investigation,
because it may be related to the agonist-induced transition of the
receptor into active form. We elected the double mutant for further
study, because only the elimination of both OH groups leads to an
unambiguous conclusion that no hydrogen bond interactions are possible
between the catechol ring and that site of TM5.
Thermodynamic Analysis for the Deletion of Both Hydroxyl Groups
from Ligand and Receptor.
We first chose to determine the overall
component of agonist binding energy that can be attributed to hydroxyl
group interactions by computing the free energy couplings for
concomitant mutations applied to each and both interacting partners of
a ligand binding process (see "Theoretical Background" in
Methods and Methods).
To this end, we prepared a number of transfected CHO cell lines stably
expressing different levels of either wild-type (SS) or S204A, S207A
mutated receptors (AA). In membranes obtained from such clones, we
compared the binding affinities of a number of agonists, such as
isoproterenol in both racemic and pure enantiomeric form,
(±)-epinephrine, and its dehydroxylated analog
(±)2-(methylamino)-1-phenyl-1-ethanol (mape). All measurements were
performed in the presence and absence of GTP, to assess to which extent
a possible interference of the G protein interaction could complicate
the interpretation of the analysis.
As summarized in Table 2, the double
serine deletion decreased the binding affinity of isoproterenol to an
extent similar to that observed in COS-7 cells, for measurements made
in the presence of GTP (70- ± 13-fold), or slightly greater in its
absence (153- ± 18-fold). A similar pattern was observed for
the affinities of epinephrine, although the shift was somewhat larger
(186- ± 20-fold plus and 371- ± 45-fold minus GTP,
respectively). In agreement with previous findings (Strader et al.,
1989
), the enantiomeric nature of the ligand had no influence on the
shift of affinity induced by the mutation, as equivalent diminutions of
binding affinity were observed for (+) and (
) enantiomers of
isoproterenol or the racemic form (data not shown). The binding
affinity of the noncatecholic agonist mape was affected very little by
the AA mutation (2.2- ± 0.3-fold, ±GTP), which agrees with
observations made using the isopropylamino analog of mape in hamster
2-AR (Strader et al., 1989
).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 2
Dissociation constant of adrenergic ligands for the binding to wild
type and mutant adrenergic receptors
Binding isotherms for adrenergic ligands in competition for
monoiodinated 125I-pindolol were generated as described in
Materials and Methods in membranes prepared from CHO cells
expressing the indicated mutant or wild-type receptors. Data were
analyzed with the computer program ALLFIT (DeLean et al, 1978 ) and are
presented as dissociation constants. Mean ± S.E. computed from
three to seven independent experiments.
|
|
The free energy changes computed from the binding affinities of
epinephrine and mape to wild-type and mutated receptors stand at the
corners of a thermodynamic reaction cycle, as drawn in Table
3. The differences (
G)
among experimentally measured free energy differences represent the
same "alchemical" reaction, i.e., removal of two hydroxyl
groups, which is applied to the receptor (
G(1)),
the ligand (
G(2)), or both (
G(1|2)
and 
G(2|1)). In fact, mape and epinephrine only
differ for the presence of two hydroxyl groups (Table 3), just like the
double alanine receptor differs from the wild type. The difference
between parallel paths (free energy coupling) is a direct measure of
the degree of interaction between the two perturbations. If
G1,2 is null or very close to zero
there is perfect additivity between the two effects, thus it is
unlikely that the pairs of hydroxyl groups of ligand and receptor are
involved in an interaction during the binding process. The greater the
difference between
G1,2 and zero,
the more likely is the existence of a direct interaction.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 3
Thermodynamic cycle for hydroxyl groups removal from ligand and
receptor
Free energy changes are computed as described in using
the data summarized in Table 2. The averages of the differences and
their S.D. values were computed from the individual values obtained in
each experiment after conversion into energy value. Free energy values
are given in RT units.
|
|
We computed a free energy coupling between
4 (with GTP) and
5 (no
GTP) RT units from the experimental data summarized in Table
3, which demonstrates the existence of interaction between the hydroxyl
groups of the agonist and the receptor. The negative sign and the size
of the calculated
G1,2 indicates
strong "positive cooperativity" between the two perturbations, in
the sense that the effect of abolishing hydroxyl groups from the
receptor "facilitates" that of their removal from the ligand (and
vice versa). Thus, there is almost no additivity between the two
perturbations. In fact, if two sets of groups establish hydrogen bonds
in the ligand-receptor interaction, the effect of removing the donors
from one of the reacting partners cannot increase much further by
additionally deleting the acceptors from the other.
However, the deletion of OH groups produced a greater loss of binding
energy when applied to the receptor than to the ligand (
G(1) > 
G(2), Table 3). This suggests that in spite of the overall
coupling, there is also an additive component in the effect of the
mutation of the receptor on binding affinity (see "Theoretical Background" in Methods and Methods). Thus, the change of
affinity induced by serine mutagenesis in the receptor is not explained entirely by the loss of docking interactions with the ligand, but may
also include a conformational mediated mechanism.
Effect of the Hydroxyl Groups' Deletion on Signal Transduction.
It is not possible to compute the free energy coupling for the
effect of the removal of hydroxyl groups on the conversion of the
receptor into active form, because the signaling activity of the
receptor cannot be described as a free energy change. However, we
compared on a qualitative basis how dehydroxylation of either ligand
and receptor affects signal transduction.
Concentration-response curves for epinephrine and mape-mediated
stimulation of adenylyl cyclase activity were obtained in wild-type and
mutant receptors using cell lines displaying various levels of receptor
expressions. There was no measurable adrenergic response nor specific
pindolol binding in untransfected cells or control CHO lines expressing
the neo-resistance plasmid (data not shown).
The maximal effect for epinephrine-mediated stimulation of enzymatic
activity was reduced 40 to 50% by removal of hydroxyl groups from the
receptor (compare epinephrine in Fig.
1, A and B). A similar reduction was
caused at wild-type receptors after removal of hydroxyl groups from the
ligand (epinephrine versus mape, Fig. 1A). As a consequence, mape is
partial agonist in wild-type receptors, but an agonist as full as
epinephrine and isoproterenol in mutated receptors (Fig. 1B). The
mutation also increased the EC50 for full
agonist-mediated stimulations, to an extent comparable with the shift
of affinity measured in binding studies, but had little effect on that
of mape (Fig. 1D). There was little influence of receptor density on
the EC50 of agonists, and the relation between
Emax and apparent receptor concentrations
determined in various clones did not deviate significantly from
linearity, in both wild-type and mutant receptors (Fig. 1C). This means
that there is little amplification between receptor occupation and cyclase response in this system, thus the differences in apparent intrinsic activity of ligands may be assumed proportional to the differences in their efficacies.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Adenylyl cyclase responses mediated by wild-type and
(S204A, S207A) 2-AR. CHO lines expressing wild-type (SS)
or (S204A, S207A) 2-AR (AA) were prepared as described
in Materials and Methods. Top panels,
concentration-response curves for epinephrine or mape-stimulated
enzymatic activity (10 min) in membranes prepared from CHO cells
expressing wild-type (A) or mutant (B) receptor. The points are
averages of triplicate determinations and were divided for the
Bmax values measured in the membrane of the
two cell lines (12.5 and 11.2 pmol/mg in wild-type and
mutant-expressing cells, respectively). Bottom panels,
concentration-response curves as those shown in the top panels were
generated in membranes prepared from CHO cells expressing different
concentrations of wild-type and mutant receptors, as indicated. Maximal
(Emax, C) and half-maximal
(EC50, D) stimulations were estimated using ALLFIT (DeLean
et al., 1978 ) and are plotted as a function of receptor concentration
measured in the corresponding membranes.
|
|
In conclusion, hydroxyl groups removal produces the same decrease of
agonist efficacy either when the deletion affects the ligand or the
receptor, which means that the effects of the two perturbations are
cooperative (nonadditive) not only on agonist affinity, but also on
agonist-induced activation of the receptor.
This was further confirmed by examination of the effects of mutating
ligand and receptor on guanine nucleotide-induced shifts of agonist
affinity. The mutated receptor displayed a significantly reduced effect
of GTP on agonist binding isotherms. Likewise, the effect of GTP on
mape binding was negligible either in wild-type and in mutant receptor
(Fig. 2). Thus, removal of hydroxyl
groups from the ligand (mape versus epinephrine, Fig. 2) reduces GTP effect just like it does the removal of hydroxyl groups from the receptor (isoproterenol and epinephrine in wild type versus mutant receptors, Fig. 2). We do not know why dehydroxylation of either ligand
or receptor seems to suppress GTP effect on binding entirely, whereas
in both cases at least 50% of cyclase response can still be detected
(Fig. 1). As shown in frog erythrocytes, GTP shift and agonist
intrinsic activity are correlated (Lefkowitz et al., 1976
; DeLean et
al., 1980
). However, the sensitivity of the detection of GTP shifts
depends on the conditions of the binding assay and on the cell membrane
under study. It is nonetheless clear that the reduction of such
parameter induced by mutations of ligand or receptor are very similar.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Effect of GTP on the binding isotherms of adrenergic
agonists in wild-type and [S204A,
S207A] 2-AR. The binding of the indicated
agonists was studied as competition for the sites labeled by
125I-pindolol in membranes of CHO cells expressing
wild-type or mutant receptors, either in the presence or absence of GTP
(100 µM). The points are means of data generated in three independent
experiments, each performed as duplicate determinations.
|
|
Interaction between Hydroxyl Group Deletion and Constitutive
Activation.
The data presented suggest that the interactions
between catechol hydroxyl groups of the ligand and TM5 serines of the
receptor contribute to both agonist affinity and agonist-induced
conversion of the receptor into R*. In addition, the double
mutant analysis of this interaction suggests that the loss of binding free energy attributable to the removal of serine residues from the
receptor may involve a conformational shift. To verify this hypothesis
we used a second double-mutant cycle. We measured the possible
interaction between two receptor mutations that affect binding energy
through different mechanisms. One is the double-alanine substitution
(AA) investigated above. The second is a mutation enhancing the
constitutive activity of the receptor. As described previously,
mutagenesis of residues located in the C-terminal portion of the
third intracellular loop of the receptor enhance ligand-independent activity but also increase agonist affinity in a
manner related to agonist efficacy (Samama et al., 1993
). This increase
in affinity is mediated allosterically because the targeted
residues cannot directly contact the ligand, and it can be explained if
we assume that such mutation shifts the equilibrium of the receptor
toward the active form R* (Samama et al., 1993
).
Therefore, the two mutations cam and AA represent mechanistically
distinct perturbations of binding affinity borne into functionally different sites of the same molecule. The free energy coupling, i.e.,
the extent of linkage, between these two perturbations has interesting
implications. If the serines targeted by the AA mutation only provided
pure `docking' forces for the ligand and did not contribute at all to
the conformational equilibrium that turns the receptor into active
form, then the effects of the two mutations AA and cam should be
independent of one another (perfectly additive), with free energy
coupling equal to zero. A nonzero value instead implies interaction and
would suggest that a proportion of the effect of the AA mutation can be
attributed to an allosteric mechanism.
Receptor cDNAs carrying the AA mutation, the cam mutation, or both
(camAA), were transfected into CHO cells, and agonist equilibrium affinities were measured in permanently expressing clonal lines (Table
2). The computed free energy changes for ligand binding to wild-type
(SS) and the three mutated receptors (AA, cam, and camAA) form the
corners of a close thermodynamic cycle (Table 4). Their differences mark four
"alchemical" reaction paths, the linkage among which measures the
extent of long-range intramolecular interaction between perturbations
originating at distinct sites of the same macromolecule.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 4
Thermodynamic cycle for the effects on ligand affinity of mutations
applied to the agonist (SS AA) or to the G protein side (SS Cam) of the receptor
Computations and data presentation as in Table 3.
|
|
Using the agonist isoproterenol, the magnitude of the computed free
energy coupling, although small, was significantly greater than zero,
according to measurements made both in the presence and absence of GTP
(Table 4, X = isoproterenol). Similar values (0.93 ± 0.21 and
2.1 ± 0.17 without and with GTP, respectively) were determined
for the agonist (±)- epinephrine (not shown in Table 4). In contrast,
the free energy coupling measured for the binding affinities of the
antagonist pindolol was not significantly different from zero (Table 4,
X = pindolol).
Thus, the effects produced by the two perturbations are perfectly
additive on the affinity of the antagonist, but show an interactive
component on that of the agonist. This means that there is linkage
between the two mutations, which is only apparent although if the
ligand has the ability to convert the receptor into active form. As
reflected in the negative cooperative nature of such interaction
(positive sign of the free energy coupling), AA and cam exert inverse
effects on agonist affinity. Yet, the small value of free energy
coupling indicates that part of such opposite effect is cooperative,
and thus mediated through a common intramolecular mechanism. Because
the cam mutation enhances agonist affinity as a result of the shift of
the equilibrium toward the active receptor form, the "negative"
linkage found here implies that the AA mutation also changes the same
equilibrium, into the opposite direction.
A finer way to perform this analysis is to compute the free energy
coupling for all three perturbations together, as shown in Table
5. Free energy changes for epinephrine
and mape binding to the wild-type and the three mutant receptors can be
assembled into a three-dimensional reaction scheme representing three
concomitant "alchemical" changes: 1) dehydroxylation of the
receptor, 2) dehydroxylation of the ligand, and 3) constitutive
activation. Free energy coupling for this triple-mutation cycle yields
the global linkage among the three effects, independently of the
interactions observed in all possible pairwise comparisons. This higher
order coupling is a direct measure of the effect that each of the three
perturbations has on the interaction between the other two. It tells,
for example, whether and to which extent constitutive activation is
linked to the interaction among hydroxyl groups of ligand and receptor, or vice versa. We measure a non-null value of
1 and
2 RT
units (±GTP) of free energy for this linkage (Table 5), which means that the conformational mechanism that enhance binding energy in
response to constitutive activation share a common component with the
conformational consequences of OH interactions between agonist and
receptor.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 5
Three concurrent perturbations: Hydroxyl group removal and the two
receptor mutations
Computations and data presentation as in Table
3.
|
|
Taken collectively, the thermodynamic analyses of double or triple
mutant cycles presented suggest that the deletion of TM5 serines from
2-AR not only severs an important docking site
for the agonist, as discovered previously, but also shifts the
conformational equilibrium of the receptor toward the inactive form. If
this is true, the ligand-independent activity of the mutated receptor should be decreased.
Serine Deletion Diminishes the Constitutive Activity of the
Receptor.
We first endeavored to test such prediction using stably
transfected CHO lines exhibiting a suitable range of receptor
expression. But the relation between basal adenylyl cyclase activity
and receptor density failed to show any consistent degree of
constitutive activity for wild-type receptors (Fig.
3A), which makes consequently impossible to determine a potential inhibitory effect of the AA mutation on such
parameter. Enhancement of constitutive activity was readily detectable
instead in clones transfected with the cam mutation, despite the much
lower level of receptor expression (Fig. 3B). Through the comparison of
cells expressing cam or camAA mutant receptors we examined the effect
of superimposing the OH deletion on the constitutive activated
mutation. There is a definite trend for a decrease of constitutive
activity in the receptor carrying both modifications compared with cam
alone (Fig. 3B). However, given the very modest range of expression of
the camAA mutant, such result provides only presumptive evidence that
OH groups deletion may lower the constitutive activity induced by
mutagenesis.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Basal and agonist-stimulated adenylyl cyclase
activity as a function of receptor concentration. Adenylyl cyclase
activity was measured in membranes from CHO cells expressing wild-type
and mutant 2 AR. The enzymatic activity was determined
using three time-points in duplicate (2, 4, and 8 min) either in the
absence (BAS) or presence of 100 µM ( )isoproterenol (ISO) and was
calculated from the slope of the linear regressions. The data are
plotted as a function of the receptor density measured in the same
membranes by 125I-pindolol binding curves, and are
means ± S.E. of three independent experiments. A, comparison
between cells expressing wild-type (SS) and [S204A, S207A] mutant
(AA) receptor. Note that no receptor-dependent increase of basal
activity can be detected. B, comparison between cells expressing cam
and receptors carrying both mutations (cam-AA).
|
|
We thus turned to a transient transfection system in COS-7 cells, where
the constitutive activity of the receptor can be detected effectively
as enhancement of basal intracellular cAMP concentrations that follows
peak-expression of receptor cDNA (Parma et al., 1993
; Samama et al.,
1993
; Shenker et al., 1993
).
When COS cells are transfected with progressively increasing abundance
of coding plasmids, the relation between pmol of expressed receptors
and µg of coding cDNA is strictly linear (Fig.
4). Although the range of receptor
expression varied extensively among different experiments, relative
differences between slopes were fairly constant and seem to reflect an
intrinsic property of each mutant. The AA mutant gave the highest
levels of expression, the camAA mutant the least. By pooling a number
of such experiments the relation between intracellular cAMP levels and
receptor density in COS cells shows no significant deviations from
linearity for wild-type or mutant receptors (Fig.
5). Therefore, the ratio between net mol
of cAMP induced by transfection and mol of expressed receptor can be
taken as a reliable measure of constitutive activity.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Receptor density as a function of the concentration
of coding cDNA. COS-7 cells were transfected with cDNA coding for
wild-type or mutant receptors as indicated. Different ratios of empty
and coding pBC vectors (as indicated on the x-axis) were
used to maintain the mass of transfected DNA constant. Receptor density
was measured in membranes from the binding isotherms of
125I-pindolol.
|
|

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Enhancement of cAMP levels by transient receptor
expression. COS-7 cells were transfected in duplicate
25-cm2 flasks, using increasing concentrations of coding
plasmids as described in Fig. 4. At 24 h post-transfection, cells
from one of the duplicate flasks were harvested and seeded into 24-well
plates. At 48 h post-transfection, cells in the second duplicate
flask were harvested for membrane preparation and determination of
receptor concentration, whereas the multiwell plated cells were used
for the assessment of intracellular cAMP concentration as described in
Materials and Methods. The actual range of receptor
expression varied between experiments, despite the use of the same
dilution range of coding plasmids. The plots are thus an overlay of
three independent experiments in each of which wild-type and all the
mutants were compared within the same transfection. Each point
represents triplicate cAMP determinations and a
Bmax computed by nonlinear fitting of a
12-dilution binding isotherm of radiolabeled Pindolol. To assess the
significance of the difference between mutant and wild-type receptors,
the data were fitted by linear regressions (solid and
dotted lines). The calculated slopes (mole cAMP/mol
receptor) with lower-upper 95% confidence limits (in parentheses) are
as follows: SS, 0.53 (0.46-0.6); AA, 0.24 (0.20-0.28); cam, 5.5 (4.3-6.7); and camAA, 2.9 (2.2-3.6). The differences in slopes were
tested by F statistics. For the comparison SS versus AA, F (1,33) = 20.3, P < .0001; For the comparison cam versus
camAA, F (1,25) = 5.5, P = .027. The slope of
the AA mutant curve is significantly different from zero, F (1,18) = 102, (P < .0001), indicating that the
constitutive activity of this receptor is reduced compared with the
wild-type, but is not abolished.
|
|
As summarized in Figs. 5 and 6, the
constitutive activity of the AA mutant thus measured was significantly
smaller than that of the wild type (37 ± 2%, n = 10), indicating that OH deletion indeed reduces the intrinsic
signaling ability of the receptor regardless of the presence of an
agonist. The same deletion also diminished the ligand-independent
activity of the constitutively active receptor as indicated by the
comparison between cam and camAA mutants (Fig. 6). Although the
decrease in this case seems to be smaller than that induced by the AA
mutation on wild type, it is not clear whether the difference reflects
reality or experimental noise, as it was difficult to achieve an ample
range of expression for the camAA mutant even in COS cells.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Comparison of the constitutive activity of wild-type
and mutant 2-AR COS-7 cells were transfected
with cDNA coding for mutants, wild-type receptors, and empty vector.
Receptor density and cAMP levels were measured in parallel as explained
in Fig. 5. Constitutive activity is computed as the ratio
between net pmols of cAMP produced and net pmol of expressed receptor,
after subtraction of the basal cAMP levels (range, 15-25 pmol/mg) and
the basal concentration of endogenous 2-AR (range,
0.3-0.5 pmol/mg) measured in cells transfected with noncoding vector
in parallel. These ratios are equivalent to the slopes of the
regression lines measured in Fig. 5. The data are means ± S.D. of
the number of independent experiments shown on top of each bar. In each
experiment, cAMP levels were determined in quadruplicate wells, and
Bmax was estimated from computer analyses of
a 12-dilution binding isotherms of pindolol.
|
|
We noted that the ratio between cam and wild-type receptor expression
obtained at a given concentration of transfected DNA is smaller when
determined in membrane than in intact cells. This phenomenon, which
probably reflects the intrinsic instability of receptors carrying
activating mutations noted earlier (Gether et al., 1997
), may influence
the estimates of the extent of constitutive activity for the mutations.
Thus, we also compared the constitutive activity of mutants using
intact cells to assess the density of surface receptors. As shown in
Fig. 7, the fold enhancement of constitutive activity over that of the wild type produced by the cam
mutation is two-times smaller when
Bmax is determined in cells than in
membranes (Fig. 6). However, it is clear also in these experiments that
receptors carrying OH deletions have a significantly reduced
constitutive activity compared with wild type or to cam mutants.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Constitutive activity of wild-type and mutant
2-AR determined in intact cell assays COS-7
cells were transfected and processed as described in Figs. 5 and 6.
However, the concentration of expressed receptors was determined in
intact cells (see Materials and Methods) using the
hydrophilic adrenergic antagonist [3H]CGP 12177.
|
|
In conclusion, the deletion of S204 and S207 side chains exerts a
negative allosteric effect on the basal (ligand-independent) biological
activity of the receptor and confirms the predictions resulting from
the analysis of free energy conservation among multiple mutations. Both
types of information support the idea that the mutation can shift the
conformational equilibrium of the receptor toward the inactive form.
Moreover, these data indicate that the inhibitory effect of mutagenesis
of serines 204 and 207 on the basal activity of the vacant receptor
(Figs. 6 and 7) is comparable with that exerted on agonist-induced
receptor activity (Fig. 1). This further supports the notion that the
mutation can alter the intrinsic equilibrium of the receptor, not only
its response to the ligand.
We wondered whether an alternative explanation could account for the
reduction of constitutive activity caused by the AA mutation. For
example, a mutation can decrease constitut