1. Computational and Systems Biology
  2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
Download icon

Common activation mechanism of class A GPCRs

  1. Qingtong Zhou
  2. Dehua Yang
  3. Meng Wu
  4. Yu Guo
  5. Wangjing Guo
  6. Li Zhong
  7. Xiaoqing Cai
  8. Antao Dai
  9. Wonjo Jang
  10. Eugene I Shakhnovich
  11. Zhi-Jie Liu
  12. Raymond C Stevens
  13. Nevin A Lambert
  14. M Madan Babu  Is a corresponding author
  15. Ming-Wei Wang  Is a corresponding author
  16. Suwen Zhao  Is a corresponding author
  1. ShanghaiTech University, China
  2. Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, China
  3. Augusta University, United States
  4. Harvard University, United States
  5. MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, United Kingdom
Research Article
  • Cited 38
  • Views 10,086
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e50279 doi: 10.7554/eLife.50279

Abstract

Class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) influence virtually every aspect of human physiology. Understanding receptor activation mechanism is critical for discovering novel therapeutics since about one-third of all marketed drugs target members of this family. GPCR activation is an allosteric process that couples agonist binding to G protein recruitment, with the hallmark outward movement of transmembrane helix 6 (TM6). However, what leads to TM6 movement and the key residue level changes of this movement remain less well understood. Here, we report a framework to quantify conformational changes. By analyzing the conformational changes in 234 structures from 45 class A GPCRs, we discovered a common GPCR activation pathway comprising of 34 residue pairs and 35 residues. The pathway unifies previous findings into a common activation mechanism and strings together the scattered key motifs such as CWxP, DRY, Na+ pocket, NPxxY and PIF, thereby directly linking the bottom of ligand-binding pocket with G protein coupling region. Site-directed mutagenesis experiments support this proposition and reveal that rational mutations of residues in this pathway can be used to obtain receptors that are constitutively active or inactive. The common activation pathway provides the mechanistic interpretation of constitutively activating, inactivating and disease mutations. As a module responsible for activation, the common pathway allows for decoupling of the evolution of the ligand binding site and G protein binding region. Such an architecture might have facilitated GPCRs to emerge as a highly successful family of proteins for signal transduction in nature.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for Figures 1, 2, 6 and 7.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Qingtong Zhou

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  2. Dehua Yang

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3028-3243

  3. Meng Wu

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Yu Guo

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Wangjing Guo

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  6. Li Zhong

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  7. Xiaoqing Cai

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Antao Dai

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  9. Wonjo Jang

    Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Augusta University, Augusta, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  10. Eugene I Shakhnovich

    Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4769-2265

  11. Zhi-Jie Liu

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7279-2893

  12. Raymond C Stevens

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  13. Nevin A Lambert

    Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Augusta University, Augusta, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  14. M Madan Babu

    MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    madanm@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  15. Ming-Wei Wang

    The CAS Key Laboratory of Receptor Research, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
    For correspondence
    mwwang@simm.ac.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  16. Suwen Zhao

    iHuman Institute, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, China
    For correspondence
    zhaosw@shanghaitech.edu.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5609-434X

Funding

Medical Research Council (MC_U105185859)

  • M Madan Babu

National Mega R&D Program for Drug Discovery (2018ZX09735-001)

  • Ming-Wei Wang

National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFC0905900)

  • Suwen Zhao

National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFA0507000)

  • Suwen Zhao

National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFA0507000)

  • Ming-Wei Wang

National Natural Science Foundation of China (31971178)

  • Suwen Zhao

National Natural Science Foundation of China (81872915)

  • Ming-Wei Wang

Novo Nordisk-CAS Research (NNCAS-2017-1-CC)

  • Dehua Yang

Young Talent Program of Shanghai

  • Suwen Zhao

Shanghai Science and Technology Development Fund (16ZR1448500)

  • Suwen Zhao

Shanghai Science and Technology Development Fund (16ZR1407100)

  • Antao Dai

National Natural Science Foundation of China (21704064)

  • Qingtong Zhou

National Natural Science Foundation of China (81573479)

  • Dehua Yang

National Natural Science Foundation of China (81773792)

  • Dehua Yang

National Mega R&D Program for Drug Discovery (2018ZX09711002-002-005)

  • Dehua Yang

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Yibing Shan, DE Shaw Research, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: July 17, 2019
  2. Accepted: December 19, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 19, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 10, 2020 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: February 25, 2020 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2019, Zhou 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

  • 10,086
    Page views
  • 1,713
    Downloads
  • 38
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

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

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

Categories and tags

Research organism

    1. Of interest

    The discriminatory power of the T cell receptor

    Johannes Pettmann et al.
  2. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation

    The discriminatory power of the T cell receptor

    Johannes Pettmann et al.
    Research Article Updated

    T cells use their T cell receptors (TCRs) to discriminate between lower-affinity self and higher-affinity non-self peptides presented on major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) antigens. Although the discriminatory power of the TCR is widely believed to be near-perfect, technical difficulties have hampered efforts to precisely quantify it. Here, we describe a method for measuring very low TCR/pMHC affinities and use it to measure the discriminatory power of the TCR and the factors affecting it. We find that TCR discrimination, although enhanced compared with conventional cell-surface receptors, is imperfect: primary human T cells can respond to pMHC with affinities as low as KD ∼ 1 mM. The kinetic proofreading mechanism fit our data, providing the first estimates of both the time delay (2.8 s) and number of biochemical steps (2.67) that are consistent with the extraordinary sensitivity of antigen recognition. Our findings explain why self pMHC frequently induce autoimmune diseases and anti-tumour responses, and suggest ways to modify TCR discrimination.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience

    Low-dimensional learned feature spaces quantify individual and group differences in vocal repertoires

    Jack Goffinet et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Increases in the scale and complexity of behavioral data pose an increasing challenge for data analysis. A common strategy involves replacing entire behaviors with small numbers of handpicked, domain-specific features, but this approach suffers from several crucial limitations. For example, handpicked features may miss important dimensions of variability, and correlations among them complicate statistical testing. Here, by contrast, we apply the variational autoencoder (VAE), an unsupervised learning method, to learn features directly from data and quantify the vocal behavior of two model species: the laboratory mouse and the zebra finch. The VAE converges on a parsimonious representation that outperforms handpicked features on a variety of common analysis tasks, enables the measurement of moment-by-moment vocal variability on the timescale of tens of milliseconds in the zebra finch, provides strong evidence that mouse ultrasonic vocalizations do not cluster as is commonly believed, and captures the similarity of tutor and pupil birdsong with qualitatively higher fidelity than previous approaches. In all, we demonstrate the utility of modern unsupervised learning approaches to the quantification of complex and high-dimensional vocal behavior.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology

    An evolutionary model identifies the main evolutionary biases for the evolution of genome-replication profiles

    Rossana Droghetti et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Recent results comparing the temporal program of genome replication of yeast species belonging to the Lachancea clade support the scenario that the evolution of the replication timing program could be mainly driven by correlated acquisition and loss events of active replication origins. Using these results as a benchmark, we develop an evolutionary model defined as birth-death process for replication origins and use it to identify the evolutionary biases that shape the replication timing profiles. Comparing different evolutionary models with data, we find that replication origin birth and death events are mainly driven by two evolutionary pressures, the first imposes that events leading to higher double-stall probability of replication forks are penalized, while the second makes less efficient origins more prone to evolutionary loss. This analysis provides an empirically grounded predictive framework for quantitative evolutionary studies of the replication timing program.