PSI Structural Biology Knowledgebase

PSI | Structural Biology Knowledgebase
Header Icons
E-Collection

Related Articles
Drug Discovery: Solving the Structure of an Anti-hypertension Drug Target
July 2015
Retrospective: 7,000 Structures Closer to Understanding Biology
July 2015
Families in Gene Neighborhoods
June 2015
Channels and Transporters: BEST in Show
April 2015
Channels and Transporters: Reorienting a Peptide in the Pocket
April 2015
Ryanodine Receptor
April 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: It's the Journey, Not the Destination
March 2015
Protein Folding and Misfolding: Refolding in Membrane Mimetic
March 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: A Flexible Transporter
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Higher Resolution of Macromolecules
February 2015
Nuclear Pore Complex: Integrative Approach to Probe Nup133
February 2015
Piecing Together the Nuclear Pore Complex
February 2015
Mitochondrion: Flipping for UCP2
December 2014
Transmembrane Spans
December 2014
Glucagon Receptor
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: A Cap on Transport
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: Microcrystals Yield Big Data
April 2014
Membrane Proteome: Pumping Out Heavy Metal
April 2014
Design and Discovery: Virtual Drug Screening
January 2014
G Proteins and Cancer
November 2013
Drug Discovery: Antidepressant Potential of 6-NQ SERT Inhibitors
October 2013
Drug Discovery: Modeling NET Interactions
October 2013
Microbiome: Solid-State NMR, Crystallized
September 2013
CAAX Endoproteases
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: A Funnel-like Viroporin
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: GPCR Substrate Recognition and Functional Selectivity
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: Making DNA Nanotubes for NMR Structure Determination
August 2013
Membrane Proteome: Unveiling the Human α-helical Membrane Proteome
August 2013
Cell-Cell Interaction: Magic Structure from Microcrystals
March 2013
Cell-Cell Interaction: Nanoparticles in Cell Camouflage
March 2013
Membrane Proteome: Capturing Multiple Conformations
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Soft Sampling
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Sphingolipid Synthesis Selectivity
December 2012
Membrane Proteome: Tuning Membrane Protein Expression
December 2012
Cytochrome Oxidase
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Building a Carrier
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Every Protein Has Its Tag
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: Specific vs. Non-specific weak interactions
November 2012
Membrane Proteome: The ABCs of Transport
November 2012
Bacterial Phosphotransferase System
October 2012
Insert Here
October 2012
Solute Channels
September 2012
To structure, faster
August 2012
Pocket changes
July 2012
Predictive protein origami
July 2012
G Protein-Coupled Receptors
May 2012
Twist to open
March 2012
Anchoring's the way
February 2012
Overexpressed problems
February 2012
Gentle membrane protein extraction
January 2012
Docking and rolling
October 2011
A fragmented approach to membrane protein structures
September 2011
Raising a glass to GLIC
August 2011
Sugar transport
June 2011
A2A Adenosine Receptor
May 2011
TrkH Potassium Ion Transporter
April 2011
Subtly different
March 2011
A new amphiphile for crystallizing membrane proteins
January 2011
CXCR4
January 2011
Guard cells pick up the SLAC
December 2010
ABA receptor diversity
November 2010
COX inhibition: Naproxen by proxy
November 2010
Zinc Transporter ZntB
July 2010
Formate transporter or channel?
March 2010
Tips for crystallizing membrane proteins in lipidic mesophases
February 2010
Urea transporter
February 2010
Five good reasons to use single protein production for membrane proteins
January 2010
Membrane proteins spotted in their native habitat
January 2010
Spot the pore
January 2010
Get3 into the groove
October 2009
GPCR subunits: Separate but not equal
September 2009
GPCR modeling: any good?
August 2009
Surviving in an acid environment
August 2009
Tips for crystallizing membrane proteins
June 2009
You look familiar: the Type VI secretion system
June 2009
Bacterial Leucine Transporter, LeuT
May 2009
Aquaglyceroporin
March 2009
Death clusters
March 2009
Protein nanopores
March 2009
Transporter mechanism in sight
February 2009
A pocket guide to GPCRs
December 2008
Tuning membrane protein overexpression
October 2008
Blocking AmtB
September 2008

Research Themes Membrane proteins

Membrane Proteome: GPCR Substrate Recognition and Functional Selectivity

SBKB [doi:10.1038/sbkb.2012.153]
Featured Article - August 2013
Short description: Crystal structures of 5-HT receptors bound to antimigraine drugs offer insights into ligand specificity and signaling bias.

Differences in the expanded ligand binding pocket of 5-HT1B (light blue) and 5-HT2B (green) result in conformational differences in the bound ERG (cyan and magenta, respectively). Figure courtesy of Daniel Wacker.

The neurotransmitter serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)) signals through the 5-HT receptors, a family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). In addition to signaling via canonical G protein pathways, GPCRs can signal via noncanonical pathways, frequently mediated via β-arrestin. These receptors are the targets for many drugs, including antimigraine medications, antipsychotics and antidepressants, but the use of many of these drugs is complicated by side effects caused by off-target interactions with 5-HT receptor subtypes and related biogenic amine receptors. Some drugs are also able to elicit biased signaling, preferentially activating canonical or noncanonical pathways (as opposed to activating both pathways equally).

To gain a better understanding of how serotonergic drugs are recognized by 5-HT receptors, Xu, Roth, Stevens and colleagues (PSI GPCR Network) determined the structures of the antimigraine drug ergotamine (ERG) bound to its primary target, the 5-HT1B receptor (PDB 4IAR), and to the 5-HT2B receptor (PDB 4IB4). They also obtained the structure of 5-HT1B in complex with dihydroergotamine (PDB 4IAQ).

The receptors are comprised of seven transmembrane (7TM) α-helices. The ligand-binding cavity in each receptor, formed by residues in helices III, V, VI and VII, is capped by the second extracellular loop (ECL2). The ergoline ring of ERG sits deep within the 7TM core in 5-HT1B and 5-HT2B, forming similar key interactions in a conserved orthosteric binding pocket in both receptors. 5-HT1B has a much broader extended binding pocket than that of 5-HT2B, due to sequence differences and an outward shift at the extracellular end of helix V. As a result, the phenyl group of the ERG cyclic tripeptide makes different interactions with and adopts distinct conformations within each of the receptors. Mutational and docking analyses reveal that interactions with the ergoline moiety of ERG and related compounds appear to be the driving force for binding. Indeed, these results explain how the hallucinogen lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), another ergoline, can interact promiscuously with 5-HT receptors. In contrast, triptans, antimigraine drugs that are 5-HT analogs, interact weakly with 5-HT2B because their specific shapes do not fit in the receptor's relatively small extended binding pocket.

The authors also show that LSD, ERG and other ergolines display biased signaling for β-arrestin at 5-HT2B, but are essentially unbiased at 5-HT1B. Examination of the ERG-bound crystal structures reveals that the P-I-F motif — Pro, Ile, and Phe residues found at the base of the ligand binding pocket— is in an active-like conformation in the 5-HT1B structure, but in an intermediate active one in the 5-HT2B structure. Investigation of the structural rearrangements induced on the cytoplasmic side of the receptors indicates that the 5-HT1B structure has features of an agonist-induced, activated receptor, with a shift in helix VI associated with G protein-coupled signaling. On the other hand, the 5-HT2B structure shows conformational changes in helix VII associated with β-arrestin signaling and only minor changes to helix VI, characteristics of both active and inactive states.

These findings provide a framework for understanding ligand specificity within GPCR subtypes and uncover the structural basis for signaling bias, and shall contribute to the rational development of drugs for this important receptor family.

Michelle Montoya

References

  1. C. Wang et al. Structural basis for molecular recognition at serotonin receptors.
    Science. 340, 610-614 (2013). doi:10.1126/science.1232807

  2. D. Wacker et al. Structural features for functional selectivity at serotonin receptors.
    Science. 340, 615-619 (2013). doi:10.1126/science.1232808

Structural Biology Knowledgebase ISSN: 1758-1338
Funded by a grant from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health