Simulation of spontaneous G protein activation reveals a new intermediate driving GDP unbinding

  1. Xianqiang Sun
  2. Sukrit Singh
  3. Kendall Blumer
  4. Gregory R Bowman  Is a corresponding author
  1. Washington University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Activation of heterotrimeric G proteins is a key step in many signaling cascades. However, a complete mechanism for this process, which requires allosteric communication between binding sites that are ~30 Å apart, remains elusive. We construct an atomically-detailed model of G protein activation by combining three powerful computational methods: metadynamics, Markov state models (MSMs), and CARDS analysis of correlated motions. We uncover a mechanism that is consistent with a wide variety of structural and biochemical data. Surprisingly, the rate-limiting step for GDP release correlates with tilting rather than translation of the GPCR-binding helix 5. β-Strands 1-3 and helix 1 emerge as hubs in the allosteric network that links conformational changes in the GPCR-binding site to disordering of the distal nucleotide-binding site and consequent GDP release. Our approach and insights provide foundations for understanding disease-implicated G protein mutants, illuminating slow events in allosteric networks, and examining unbinding processes with slow off-rates.

Data availability

Summary data for all figures are made available with this manuscript. Specifically, MSM data, CARDS data, and numerical data for histograms are each provided as zipped archives. Simulation data are available upon request as there is no standard repository for such data, especially given the size of our dataset (3847 GB). The algorithms employed for calculating geometric features of protein conformations are available through MDTraj (https://github.com/mdtraj/mdtraj) and methods for building and analyzing MSMs are available through MSMBuilder (https://github.com/msmbuilder/msmbuilder) and Enspara (https://github.com/bowman-lab/enspara). The CARDS algorithm is also available through Enspara.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Xianqiang Sun

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Sukrit Singh

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1914-4955
  3. Kendall Blumer

    Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Gregory R Bowman

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, United States
    For correspondence
    g.bowman@wustl.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2083-4892

Funding

National Institutes of Health (Grant R01GM12400701)

  • Gregory R Bowman

National Science Foundation (CAREER Award MCB-1552471)

  • Gregory R Bowman

Burroughs Wellcome Fund (Career Award at the Scientific Interface)

  • Gregory R Bowman

David and Lucile Packard Foundation (Packard Fellowship for Science and Engineering)

  • Gregory R Bowman

National Institutes of Health (Grant R01GM044592)

  • Kendall Blumer
  • Gregory R Bowman

National Institutes of Health (Grant R01GM12409301)

  • Kendall Blumer
  • Gregory R Bowman

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2018, Sun et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,042
    views
  • 606
    downloads
  • 41
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Xianqiang Sun
  2. Sukrit Singh
  3. Kendall Blumer
  4. Gregory R Bowman
(2018)
Simulation of spontaneous G protein activation reveals a new intermediate driving GDP unbinding
eLife 7:e38465.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38465

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38465

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Matthew Millard, David W Franklin, Walter Herzog
    Research Article

    The force developed by actively lengthened muscle depends on different structures across different scales of lengthening. For small perturbations, the active response of muscle is well captured by a linear-time-invariant (LTI) system: a stiff spring in parallel with a light damper. The force response of muscle to longer stretches is better represented by a compliant spring that can fix its end when activated. Experimental work has shown that the stiffness and damping (impedance) of muscle in response to small perturbations is of fundamental importance to motor learning and mechanical stability, while the huge forces developed during long active stretches are critical for simulating and predicting injury. Outside of motor learning and injury, muscle is actively lengthened as a part of nearly all terrestrial locomotion. Despite the functional importance of impedance and active lengthening, no single muscle model has all these mechanical properties. In this work, we present the viscoelastic-crossbridge active-titin (VEXAT) model that can replicate the response of muscle to length changes great and small. To evaluate the VEXAT model, we compare its response to biological muscle by simulating experiments that measure the impedance of muscle, and the forces developed during long active stretches. In addition, we have also compared the responses of the VEXAT model to a popular Hill-type muscle model. The VEXAT model more accurately captures the impedance of biological muscle and its responses to long active stretches than a Hill-type model and can still reproduce the force-velocity and force-length relations of muscle. While the comparison between the VEXAT model and biological muscle is favorable, there are some phenomena that can be improved: the low frequency phase response of the model, and a mechanism to support passive force enhancement.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Kara Schmidlin, Sam Apodaca ... Kerry Geiler-Samerotte
    Research Article

    There is growing interest in designing multidrug therapies that leverage tradeoffs to combat resistance. Tradeoffs are common in evolution and occur when, for example, resistance to one drug results in sensitivity to another. Major questions remain about the extent to which tradeoffs are reliable, specifically, whether the mutants that provide resistance to a given drug all suffer similar tradeoffs. This question is difficult because the drug-resistant mutants observed in the clinic, and even those evolved in controlled laboratory settings, are often biased towards those that provide large fitness benefits. Thus, the mutations (and mechanisms) that provide drug resistance may be more diverse than current data suggests. Here, we perform evolution experiments utilizing lineage-tracking to capture a fuller spectrum of mutations that give yeast cells a fitness advantage in fluconazole, a common antifungal drug. We then quantify fitness tradeoffs for each of 774 evolved mutants across 12 environments, finding these mutants group into classes with characteristically different tradeoffs. Their unique tradeoffs may imply that each group of mutants affects fitness through different underlying mechanisms. Some of the groupings we find are surprising. For example, we find some mutants that resist single drugs do not resist their combination, while others do. And some mutants to the same gene have different tradeoffs than others. These findings, on one hand, demonstrate the difficulty in relying on consistent or intuitive tradeoffs when designing multidrug treatments. On the other hand, by demonstrating that hundreds of adaptive mutations can be reduced to a few groups with characteristic tradeoffs, our findings may yet empower multidrug strategies that leverage tradeoffs to combat resistance. More generally speaking, by grouping mutants that likely affect fitness through similar underlying mechanisms, our work guides efforts to map the phenotypic effects of mutation.