View
218
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Mapping the Agonist Binding Site of GABAB Type 1 subunit sheds light on the activation process of GABAB receptors*
Thierry Galvez ‡†, Laurent Prézeau ‡, Gérald Milioti ‡, Miloslav Franek ‡#, Cécile Joly ‡,
Wolfgang Froestl ¶, Bernhard Bettler ¶, Hugues-Olivier Bertrand §, Jaroslav Blahos ‡#, and
Jean-Philippe Pin ‡
‡ Mécanismes Moléculaires des Communications Cellulaires, CNRS-UPR9023, CCIPE, 141
rue de la Cardonille, F-34094 Montpellier, France
# Laboratory of Molecular Physiology, Charles University 3rd Medical School and Czech
Academy of Sciences, Ke Karlovu 4, Prague 2, Czech Republic
¶ TA Nervous system, Novartis Pharma AG, CH-4002 Basel, Switzerland
§ Molecular Simulations Inc., Parc Club Orsay Université, 20 rue Jean Rostand, 91893 Orsay
Cedex, France
Running title: The agonist binding pocket of the GABAB1 subunit
† To whom correspondence should be addressed:
Thierry GALVEZ
CNRS-UPR9023
CCIPE, 141 rue de la Cardonille
F-34094 Montpellier Cedex 5 - France
Tel: +33 467 14 2933
Fax: +33 467 54 2432
e.mail: galvez@ccipe.montp.inserm.fr
* This work was supported by grants from the CNRS, the French Ministry of Education and
Research (Programme Physique et Chimie du Vivant), the European Community (Biotech2
1
Copyright 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
JBC Papers in Press. Published on September 13, 2000 as Manuscript M007848200 by guest on January 31, 2018
http://ww
w.jbc.org/
Dow
nloaded from
program) and Novartis Pharma (Basel, Switzerland).
2
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
SUMMARY
The γ-amino-n-butyric acid type B (GABAB) receptor is constituted of two subunits,
GABAB1 and GABAB2, belonging to the family-3 heptahelix receptors. These proteins
possess two domains : a seven transmembrane core and an extracellular domain containing the
agonist binding site. This binding domain is likely to fold like bacterial periplasmic binding
proteins which are constituted of two lobes that close upon ligand binding. Here, using molecular
modeling and site directed mutagenesis, we have identified residues in the GABAB1 subunit
which are critical for agonist binding and activation of the heteromeric receptor. Our data
suggest that two residues (Ser246, Asp471) located within lobe-I form H-bonds and a salt
bridge with carboxylic and amino groups of GABA respectively, demonstrating the pivotal role
of lobe-I in agonist binding. Interestingly, our data also suggest that a residue within lobe-II
(Tyr366) interacts with the agonists in a closed form model of the binding domain, and its
mutation into Ala converts the agonist baclofen into an antagonist. These data demonstrate the
pivotal role played by the GABAB1 subunit in the activation of the heteromeric GABAB
receptor and are consistent with the idea that a closed state of the binding domain of family 3
receptors is required for their activation.
3
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
INTRODUCTION
The γ-amino-n-butyric acid type B (GABAB1) receptor is a member of the family 3
heptahelix receptors (1). This protein family also includes the metabotropic glutamate (mGlu)
(2), the Ca2+-sensing (CaS) (3), fish olfactory (4) and some mammalian putative taste (5) and
pheromone (6, 7) receptors. An original feature of these receptors is that their ligand binding site
is located within their large extracellular amino-terminal domain structurally independent from
the transmembrane heptahelix core region (8-10). It is currently not known how the agonist
binding within this extracellular domain leads to the conformational changes of the heptahelical
core region required for G-protein activation (11). Answering this question will give insights
into the specific functional properties of these family 3 receptors. As a first step, it is important
to get information on the structural features of their ligand binding domain.
It has previously been proposed that the ligand binding domain of family 3 heptahelix
receptors displays a 3D structure similar to that of bacterial periplasmic binding proteins (PBP)
such as the Leucine/Isoleucine/Valine-binding protein (LIVBP) (12-15). These PBPs are part of
a family of structurally related proteins which also includes AmiC, a cytoplasmic amide binding
protein involved in the control of the amidase operon in P. aeruginosa (16, 17). These proteins
consist of two distinct globular lobes interconnected by three linkers (16, 18, 19). Numerous
structural studies have revealed that these PBPs adopt at least two stabilized conformations: an
“open”, usually unbound form and a “closed” form stabilized by the bound ligand (19). In the
closed conformation, the ligand is trapped between the two lobes. Accordingly it has been
proposed that agonist binding at family 3 receptors stabilizes an active (closed) conformation of
their binding domain which in turn activates the heptahelix core region (11).
In agreement with the above described hypothesis, the ligand binding domains of mGlu1 (8),
mGlu4 (9) and GABAB1 (10) receptors have been shown to retain their ligand binding
properties in the absence of the heptahelix domain. Moreover, molecular modeling and
mutagenesis studies have further confirmed the similarity between the ligand binding sites of
PBPs such as LIVBP and that of family 3 receptors (13, 14). Up to now, only residues within one
lobe (lobe-I) have been identified as being important for agonist binding on family 3 receptors
4
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
(mGlu1, mGlu4 and CaS receptors) (13, 14, 20). Therefore the importance of the second lobe
(lobe-II) for ligand binding and receptor activation remains to be elucidated.
Another feature of family 3 heptahelix receptors is that they are found mostly as dimers (21,
22). The role of this dimerization process in the activation of the receptor is still unclear. Within
this receptor family, the GABAB receptor constitutes an excellent model for the study of the
activation mechanism of these receptors. Indeed, this receptor is an heterodimer constituted of
two subunits, GABAB1 and GABAB2, both necessary for a fully functional receptor (23-28).
Accordingly, the role of each subunit in the activation process can be analyzed.
In a previous study, we provided evidence supporting a similar 3D structure for LIVBP and
the binding domain of GABAB1 subunit, the only subunit able to bind the high affinity GABAB
receptor radioligands (24), and identified Ser246 as being critical for binding of the antagonist
[125I]-CGP64213 (15). In the present study, we have identified residues in the lobe-I of the
GABAB1 subunit critical for agonist binding and activation of the heteromeric receptor.
Moreover we show that the mutation of a residue in lobe-II of the GABAB1 subunit converts the
specific heteromeric GABAB receptor agonist baclofen, into an antagonist. In addition to
demonstrate the requirement of GABA binding on GABAB1 subunit for the activation of the
GABAB heteromeric receptor, our data are consistent with the idea that a closed form of the
binding domain of family 3 receptors is required for their activation.
5
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Materials - GABA was obtained from Sigma (L’Isle d’Abeau, France). [125I]-CGP64213
was synthesized as described elsewhere (29) and labeled to a specific radioactivity of >2,000 Ci
mmol-1 (ANAWA AG, Wangen, Switzerland). L-Baclofen was synthesized in the research
laboratories of Novartis Pharma in Basel (30). Serum, culture media, and other solutions used for
cell culture were from Life Technologies, Inc. (Cergy Pontoise, France).
Site directed mutagenesis - Single amino-acid substitution was carried out by the Quick
Change strategy (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions using
pBSB5 as a template (15). For each mutagenesis, two complementary 30-mers oligonucleotides
(sense and anti-sense; Genaxis Biotechnologie, Nimes, France) were designed to contain the
desired mutation in their center. To allow a rapid screening of the mutated clones, the primers
carried an additional silent mutation introducing (or removing) a restriction site. The presence of
each mutation of interest and the absence of undesired ones were confirmed by DNA
sequencing. Subsequently, a short fragment surrounding the mutation was subcloned in place of
the corresponding wild-type fragment of pRKBR1a (15).
Cell culture and expression in HEK293 cells - Human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells
were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (Life Technologies SARL, Cergy-
Pontoise, France) supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum, penicillin and streptomycin. Wild
type and mutated expression constructs were transfected in HEK 293 cells by electroporation as
described previously (31). Electroporation was carried out in a total volume of 300 µl with
10x106 cells. For membrane preparation, 2 µg plasmid DNA containing either wild type or the mutated
GABAB1a receptor coding sequences and 8 µg of carrier DNA were used. After electroporation,
the cells were plated on polyornithine-coated dishes.
Ligand binding assay - Ligand competition experiments were performed on membranes of
6
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
HEK-293 cells prepared as followed : 24h after transfection, the cells were washed and
homogenized in Tris-Krebs buffer (20 mM Tris-Cl pH 7.4, 118 mM NaCl, 5.6 mM glucose, 1.2
mM KH2PO4, 1.2 mM MgSO4, 4.7 mM KCl, 1.8 mM CaCl2) and centrifuged for 20 min at
40,000 g. The pellet was resuspended in Tris-Krebs buffer and stored at -80°C. For ligand
competition assays, thawed membranes (10 µg of protein) were incubated with 0.1 nM [125I]-
CGP64213 in the presence of unlabelled ligands at the indicated concentration. The incubation
was terminated by filtration through GF/C Whatman glass fibre filters (Whatman International
Ltd., Maidstone, England). The concentration of [125I]-CGP64213 used in displacement
experiments (0.1 nM ) is approximately 10 times lower than the affinity of this radioligand on
the native or GABABR1 receptor, such that the IC50 values measured for all unlabeled
compounds are not significantly different from their affinity. Non-specific binding was
determined with 10 mM GABA. Displacement curves were fitted with the Kaleidagraph
software (Abelbeck software, USA) using the equation y=[(ymax-ymin)/(1+(x/IC50)nH))+ymin
where IC50 is the concentration of cold drug necessary to displace half of the specifically bound
[125I]-CGP64213 and nH is the Hill number.
Determination of inositol phosphate (IP) accumulation - HEK 293 cells were
transfected as described above with either wild-type or mutated GABAB1a receptor expressing
plasmids (pRKBR1a, 2 µg), GABAB2 receptor (pCI-Neo-BR2, 2 µg) (25), Gqi9 (2 µg) (32)
and carrier DNA (4µg). Determination of IP accumulation in transfected cells was performed 15h
after transfection and after overnight metabolic labeling of transfected cells with [3H]-myo-
inositol (23.4 Ci/mol, NEN, France). After three washes with Krebs buffer (NaCl 146 mM, KCl
4.2 mM, MgCl2 0.5 mM, Glucose 0.1 %, Hepes 20 mM/pH 7.4), the stimulation was conducted
for 30 min in Krebs buffer containing 10 mM LiCl and the indicated concentration of agonist.
The stimulation was stopped by replacement of the incubation medium with perchloric acid (5%)
on ice and the IPs were purified on Dowex AG 1-X8 (Biorad, Ivry sur Seine, France) columns.
Results are expressed as the amount of IP produced over the radioactivity present in the
membranes. Concentrations-response curves were fitted as described for the binding assay using
the equation y=[(ymax-ymin)/(1+(x/EC50)nH))+ymin where EC50 is the agonist concentration
7
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
necessary to produce half of the maximal response.
Biotinylation of membrane proteins and western blotting - Cell surface proteins of
transfected HEK 293 cells were labeled with the membrane impermeant reagent Sulfo-NHS-
Biotin (Pierce, Bezons, France). Briefly, adherent cells were washed 3 times on ice with borate
buffer (10 mM H3BO3 pH 8.8, 140 mM NaCl) and incubated with 0.2 mg/ml of Sulfo-NHS-
Biotin in borate buffer for 30 min. The reaction was stopped by washing followed by incubation
in borate buffer with 100 mM NH4Cl for 10 min on ice. The cells were scraped in lysis buffer
(HEPES 20 mM pH 7.4, NaCl 100 mM, EDTA 5 mM) and the membranes pelleted and
solubilized in lysis buffer containing 1% Nonidet P40, 0.5% Na Deoxycholate and 0.1% SDS at
a final concentration of 5 mg/ml. The lysate was centrifuged for 1 h at 100,000 g. The soluble
fraction was incubated with streptavidin-coated agarose beads, overnight at 4°C. Bound proteins
were analyzed using Tricine-SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting using the polyclonal anti-
GABAB1 receptor antibody (33) and an ECL chemiluminescence system (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech, Orsay, France). Analysis of wild-type or mutant receptor expression was conducted
according to the same protocol.
Homology modeling of open and closed conformations and docking of baclofen - To
generate the open form model of the GABAB1 receptor extracellular domain, we modified the
multiple alignment proposed in a previous work (15) in order to take into account the secondary
structure prediction of the GABAB1 receptor extracellular domain, as determined using the PHD
program (http://maple.bioc.columbia.edu/predictprotein/), and the sequence of the recently
cloned GABAB2 receptor. Compared to our previous alignment, this resulted in a change from
residue 467 to 486 containing helix αIX of LBP/LIVBP (18). The alignment of AmiC with
LIVBP and LBP was deduced from the structural superposition of each lobe of the closed form
of AmiC on the corresponding lobe of the open form of LIVBP (16).
The open form model of the GABAB1 receptor extracellular domain were generated by the
automated homology modeling tool MODELER 5.00 (InsightII version 980, MSI) (34) as
previously described (15). The closed form model was constructed using the coordinates of the
8
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
two lobes of LBP (PDB code: 2lbp ; lobe-I: Glu 1-Arg 116, Pro 256-Asp 330; lobe-II: Ser
122-Thr 247) and LIVBP (PDB code: 2liv ; lobe-I: Glu 1- Arg 116, Pro 256-Asp 323; lobe-II:
Ser 122- Thr 247) crystalline open forms, the coordinates of the two lobes of the open form
model of GABAB1 receptor extracellular domain (lobe-I: Ser164-Arg284, Met277-Ser368
;lobe-II: Thr 127-Thr 261), and the coordinates LIVBP closed form model (generous gift from
Drs. F. Quiocho and P. O’Hara) as a template for the linkers of the hinge region. Similarly, AmiC
crystalline closed form (PDB code: 1pea) was used as a template. The resulting closed form
model of GABAB1 receptor was comparable to that obtained with the closed form model of
LIVBP. Only the latter has been used for the modeling experiments shown in this paper. The
3D/1D compatibility scores for these models (35), as determined using the Profiles_3D
algorithm using a sequence window of 21 amino acids (InsightII version 980, MSI), is always
positive and similar to that previously published (15). The global score is in the range of those
determined for the refined 3D structures of LIVBP, LBP or AmiC determined from X ray (data
not shown). Most residues of our models were in allowed regions of the Ramachandran’s map.
For “docking” experiments, baclofen was designed with a deprotonated carboxylic group
and a protonated amino group. Initially, baclofen (R-enantiomer) was manually docked in the
closed form model of GABAB1 receptor, the carboxylate moiety closed to the side chain of
Ser246 and its γ-amino group facing the side chain of Asp471. In this position, the chlorophenyl
group is pointing toward lobe-II and is in the proximity of Tyr366. In order to suppress the steric
hindrances and geometric inconsistencies, the ligand-protein complex was submitted to
molecular mechanics calculations using the Discover 3.00 calculation engine with the CFF
forcefield (Insight II version 980, MSI). The non-bond cut-off method and the dielectric
constant were respectively set up as cell multipole and distance-dependent (ε= r). Initially,
energy minimization were performed using a Steepest Descent algorithm (until the maximum
derivative was less than 2kcal/mol/Å) followed by a Conjugated Gradient algorithm(until the
maximum derivative was less than 0.01kcal/mol/Å), while the Cα-trace was tethered with a
quadratic potential. Then molecular dynamics was applied to the minimized system at constant
volume and temperature (298 K). The integration time step was set up to 1fs. During the
dynamics, the force constant value of the quadratic potential was reduced from 100 to 60, 30, 20,
9
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
10 and 0 every 40ps. A snapshot of the system was saved every 400fs. Once the system was
equilibrated, the coordinates of 20 snapshots were averaged and resubmitted to the previously
described minimization protocol with no Cα restraints. Contacts between the ligand and the
protein were subsequently analyzed using the web interface of the WHATIF program
(http://swift.embl-heidelberg.de/servers2/ ).
10
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
RESULTS
Identification of putative structural regions of the GABAB1 receptor involved in ligand
binding - Several splice variants have been identified for the GABAB1 receptor which all
possess an identical ligand binding domain but differ in their extreme N-terminal sequence (24)
or in their heptahelix regions (36, 37). All our studies have been performed with the rat
GABAB1a receptor (the first Met being residue number 1). A 3D model of the GABAB1 binding domain
has been constructed based on the structure of the open forms of LBP and LIVBP (Fig. 1a).
According to this 3D model and the known structural elements involved in leucine binding in
LIVBP, and in amide binding in AmiC (see Fig. 1), the GABA binding site would be formed by:
a) the loop between strand βC and helix αIII (loop βC-αIII according to the nomenclature of the
secondary stuctural elements of LIVBP proposed by Sack et al. (18), residues 243-250), b) the
N-terminal portion of the loop βD-βE (residues 266-272), and c) the N-termini of helices αI
(residues 184-192) and αIX (residues 463-473) (Fig. 1). We therefore undertook a systematic
analysis, by site directed mutagenesis, of all residues that can interact with ligands within these
regions (see Fig. 1b). Each mutant was analyzed for its ability to bind [125I]-CGP64213, and to
be activated by the agonists GABA and baclofen (Fig. 2).
Occupancy of the GABAB1 subunit by GABA or baclofen plays a pivotal role in the
activation of the heteromeric receptor - We have previously reported that several mutations of
the GABAB1 subunit either increase or decrease the potency of GABA and baclofen is
displacing [125I]-CGP64213 bound to the GABAB1 subunit expressed alone (see Table 1). The
effect of these mutations, as well as additional ones generated during this study, on the potency
of GABA and baclofen at the heteromeric GABAB receptor was analyzed after co-expression of
the different GABAB1 mutants with the wild-type GABAB2 subunit in HEK293 cells. The
activation of the GABAB heteromeric receptor was analyzed by measuring the stimulation of
phospholipase C via the chimeric G-protein Gqi9 (32, 38). The potencies (EC50 values) of both
GABA and baclofen were measured on the different heteromers and compared to the binding
affinity (IC50 values which, under our experimental conditions, are similar to Ki) of both GABA
11
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
and baclofen as determined by displacement of bound [125I]-CGP64213 (see Table 1) on
GABAB1 mutants expressed alone. A good correlation was found between GABA (Fig. 3) and
baclofen (data not shown) binding affinity values (IC50) on most GABAB1 mutants and the
EC50 values measured with our functional assay on the mutant heteromeric receptors. These data
show that agonist binding at the GABAB1 receptor is critical for the activation of the
heteromeric GABAB receptor and validates the use of such a functional assay to further analyze
the molecular determinants of agonist binding at the GABAB1 receptor for which no [125I]-
CGP64213 binding could be measured.
Ser246 of GABAB1a receptor is critical for agonist binding and activity - The mutation of a
residue interacting with GABA in the GABAB1 subunit is expected: 1) to either largely decrease
the potency of GABA in displacing [125I]-CGP64213 binding or to suppress [125I]-
CGP64213 binding and 2) to largely decrease the potency of agonists in activating the receptor.
Within the loops βC-αIII and βD-βE, the mutation of Ser246, Ser265 and Tyr266 were found to
largely decrease [125I]-CGP64213 binding (Fig. 4), but only the mutation of Ser246 affected
the potency of GABA and baclofen at the GABAB receptor (Fig. 1b, Table I). As shown in Fig.
4, [125I]-CGP64213 did not bind to the S246A mutant although correctly expressed in HEK
293 cells. Both GABA and baclofen were able to activate the heteromeric receptor containing the
S246A mutated GABAB1 subunit, indicating a correct expression, folding and dimerization of
the receptor. However, the EC50 values of both agonists were increased by a factor 1000
compared to those determined with the wild-type receptor (Fig. 5). Interestingly, Ser246 aligns
with Ser79 of LIVBP which interacts with ligands (Fig. 1b) (18) thus suggesting that the
hydroxyl group of Ser246 directly interacts with the agonists GABA and baclofen. In agreement
with this proposal, mutation of this residue into the more bulky Asn residue, or into Pro which
may affect the topology of this loop, suppressed both [125I]-CGP64213 binding and agonist
activation of the receptor (Table I and Fig. 5). Furthermore, even the replacement of Ser246 by a
Thr residue resulted in a large decrease in agonist potency (Table I and Fig. 5), suggesting that
the orientation of the hydroxyl group is critical for a high agonist potency. All these latter
mutants were found to be correctly expressed and targeted to the plasma membrane when co-
12
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
expressed with the wild-type GABAB2 subunit (data not shown).
Exploring helix I and IX: Asp471 is a critical residue for agonist action - We applied the
same strategy to identify residues possibly interacting with agonists within helices I and IX. The
mutation of Phe463, Tyr470 and Asp471 were found to largely decrease [125I]-CGP64213
binding (Fig. 4), but only the mutation of Asp471 affected the potency of GABA and baclofen to
activate the GABAB receptor (Fig. 1b, Table I). As shown in Fig. 4, no [125I]-CGP64213
binding could be measured on membranes expressing the Asp471 mutant receptor. Moreover,
co-expression of the mutant D471A with the wild-type GABAB2 receptor did not lead to a
functional response upon application of GABA or baclofen (Fig. 6a,b). Western blots clearly
show that the lack of function of this mutant receptor was not due to a lack of expression (Fig.
3b). Moreover, the mutant D471A was correctly inserted in the plasma membrane when co-
expressed with the GABAB2 subunit (Fig. 6c), as shown by the large amount of biotinylated
subunits after exposure of the intact cells to the non permeant protein reagent, sulfo-NHS-
Biotin. Taken together, these data reveal that Asp471 is a critical residue for agonist binding in
GABAB1 receptors. In agreement with this proposal, the conservative mutation of this Asp into
Glu was sufficient to dramatically reduce [125I]-CGP64213 binding. However, a significant
increase in IP formation could be detected upon application of either GABA or baclofen to cells
co-expressing D471E and the wild-type GABAB2 receptor, showing a very partial recovery of
the agonist action at this mutant receptor (Fig. 6). This partial recovery is likely to have been
underestimated since the expression level of the D471E mutant was lower than that of the wild-
type or D471A mutant (Fig. 4b).
Tyr366 in lobe-II decreased GABA and baclofen affinity and converts baclofen into an
antagonist - In PBPs, or related proteins, which have been crystallized in a closed form
complexed with a ligand , residues from both lobes contact the ligand (16, 19, 39-41). We
therefore examined the role of residues within lobe-II in ligand binding and agonist activity. We
focused our efforts on residues within the loops βF-αV and βH-αVII because they both face the
putative GABA binding site, and a residue interacting with amide in AmiC is located within one
13
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
of these loops (Fig. 1a, 8a, c). None of the alanine substitutions generated in these loops prevent
[125I]-CGP64213 binding (Fig. 1b, Table I, Fig. 3a). The IC50 values of both GABA and
baclofen for displacement of [125I]-CGP64213 binding were similar to those of the wild-type
receptor for all these mutants except Y366A. For this mutant, the IC50 for values of these two
agonists were increased by a factor 50-100 (Table I and Fig. 7a) whereas displacement by cold
CGP64213 was not affected (1.1 ± 0.1 nM for the wild type, 1.0 ± 0.4 nM for Y366A, n=3).
Although GABA and baclofen displayed a similar affinity for this mutant (Fig. 7a), the Y366A
subunit formed a functional receptor activated by GABA but not by baclofen (Fig. 7b). In cells
co-expressing this receptor and GABAB2, GABA stimulated IP formation by a factor 5-10, as
observed with the wild-type receptor, indicating a correct expression, targeting to the plasma
membrane and association with the wild-type GABAB2 subunit. However, no significant
formation of IP could be measured on this mutant receptor with baclofen (Fig. 7b). Accordingly,
if GABA and baclofen bind to the same site in GABAB1, baclofen is expected to act as an
antagonist at this mutant receptor (or as a very partial agonist). Indeed, as shown in Fig. 7c, 5
mM baclofen was found to inhibit the action of GABA at this mutant receptor in a competitive
manner. Thus, the mutation Y366A converts baclofen into a competitive antagonist.
Molecular modeling of the GABAB1 extracellular domain in a closed form and docking of
baclofen - In order to rationalize the effect of the mutations described above, the position of the
mutated residues were visualized in the 3D model of the extracellular domain of the GABAB1
−receptor described above (Fig. 1a). As shown in Fig. 8a and 8c, Ser246 and Asp471 are correctly
located to interact with GABA in lobe-I. The distance between the hydroxyl and carboxylic
groups of these two residues (10 Å) is compatible with this possibility, however the side chain of
Tyr366 in loop βH-αVII of lobe-II, although facing the putative GABA binding pocket in lobe-
I, is located more than 15 Å from these residues. As such, this open form model could not easily
explain the binding and functional properties of the Y366A mutant.
We therefore undertook the construction of a 3D model for a closed form of the GABAB1
binding domain using the coordinates of a 3D model of the closed form of LIVBP (42) kindly
provided by F. Quiocho, and the coordinates of the closed liganded form of AmiC (16). In the
14
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
closed form model, Tyr366 comes in close proximity to Ser246 and Asp471. Baclofen, which
corresponds to a chlorophenyl derivative of GABA (see Fig. 2) has been manually docked in this
3D model, with its carboxyl group facing Ser246, and its amino group facing Asp471. The model
has then been subjected to simulation protocols as described in the Materials and Methods
section. In this model, the carboxyl group of baclofen forms H-bonds with the hydroxyl group of
Ser246 (from lobe-I) and those of Tyr366 (from lobe-II) (distance O-O <3Å), and its amino
group forms a salt bridge with the carboxylate of Asp471 (distance N-O <3Å) (Fig. 8d). This
latter interaction is stabilized by the aromatic ring of Tyr266 and a H-bond with the backbone
(carbonyl of Pro467). The chlorophenyl group of baclofen was found to fit into a pocket lined by
Tyr366 and Trp394 from lobe-II, and Leu468 from lobe-I.
15
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
DISCUSSION
Our mutagenesis and modeling study has identified a set of residues in the GABAB1a
subunit which are critical for agonists binding and activation of the heteromeric GABAB
receptor. Our data suggest that two residues in lobe-I, Ser246 and Asp471 and one residue in
lobe-II interact with GABA and baclofen. Interestingly, the mutation of Tyr366 into Ala, not
only decreases GABA and baclofen affinity but also converts baclofen into an antagonist.
We have previously reported that Ser246 is critical for [125I]-CGP64213 binding at
GABAB1a receptors (15). Using a functional assay, we show here that this residue plays a critical role in
both GABA and baclofen action, their apparent affinity being decreased by a factor 1000 when
Ser246 is mutated into Ala or even Thr. In accordance with to the possible importance of this
residue, a search within the Drosophila and C. elegans genomes for GABAB1-like receptors
shows that this residue is conserved through evolution (43). Moreover, this residue aligns with
Ser79 of LBP and LIVBP, the hydroxyl group of which forms H-bonds with the α-carboxylic
group of leucine (18) (Fig. 9). Ser246 also aligns with Ser85 of AmiC which interacts with
acetamide (Fig. 1) (16). This Ser residue is also conserved in all mGlu receptors and has been
proposed to form H-bonds with the α-carboxylic group of glutamate (Fig. 9) (13, 14).
Accordingly we propose that Ser246 of GABAB1a also contacts via a H-bond the carboxylic
group of GABA and baclofen. This proposal is consistent with both our modeling studies, and
the identification of Asp471 as possibly forming an ionic interaction with the amino group of
these GABAB agonists (see below).
In addition to this Ser residue, the hydroxyl group of a Thr102 in LIVBP (Fig. 1b) forms H-
bonds with the α-amino group of leucine (18). A conserved Thr has been proposed to play the
same role in mGlu receptors (13, 14) (Fig. 9). In GABAB1a, this Thr residue aligns with Ser269
which does not play a critical role in GABA and baclofen binding. Interestingly, neither GABA
nor baclofen possess an α amino acid moiety (Fig. 9). Indeed we previously reported that Ser269
was involved in the effect of Ca2+ on this receptor subtype (43).
Among all other mutated residues from lobe-I, only Asp471 was found to play a critical role
in the action of GABA and baclofen. Mutation of this residue into Ala suppresses antagonist
16
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
binding as well as GABA and baclofen induced activation of the receptor. This total loss of
function did not result from a lack of expression of this mutant protein. Moreover, the D471A
mutant was found to be correctly inserted into the plasma membrane when co-expressed with
the GABAB2 receptor. Since GABAB2 is required for the plasma membrane localization of the
GABAB1 receptors (28, 44), these data also indicate that the mutation of Asp471 does not affect
the formation of the heterodimer. In agreement with such an important role of Asp471 in agonist
binding, this residue is conserved in Drosophila and C. elegans GABAB1-like receptors (data
not shown). Moreover, our modeling studies revealed that the position of this residue allows its
side chain to correctly interact with the amino group of GABA. Indeed, this residue is located at
the bottom of the binding pocket, and points toward a hydrophobic environment which lacks any
polar residue in LIVBP and constitutes the binding pocket for the side chain of leucine (18). In
this region in mGlu receptors, the side chain of an Arg (Arg78) points toward the binding pocket
(Fig. 9) and has been proposed to interact with the γ carboxylic group of glutamate in mGlu4
(14) and mGlu1 (45) receptors.
Taken together, our data show that leucine, glutamate and GABA interact in a similar
binding pocket in lobe-I of LIVBP, mGlu and GABAB1 receptors respectively (Fig. 9). They
also highlight how the same binding pocket in lobe-I has evolved within these LIVBP-like
proteins to specifically recognize different but related molecules (Fig. 9).
Our study also identified 4 residues within lobe-I, Ser265, Tyr266, Phe463 and Tyr470 the
mutation of which dramatically decrease [125I]-CGP64213 binding, but does not change the
properties and apparent affinity of both GABA and baclofen. Although the lack of significant
binding to the S265A, Y266F and Y470F mutants may result from their low expression level,
this cannot be the case for the F463A and Y470A mutants (data not shown and Fig. 4). One may
therefore propose that these two residues are required for the binding of this large GABAB
antagonist which possesses two aromatic moieties (Fig. 2). However, additional experiments are
required to better characterize the role of these residues in GABAB antagonists binding and
action.
The data discussed above demonstrate the pivotal role of lobe-I in ligand binding to the
GABAB1 receptor, and in the agonist activation of the heteromeric receptor. However, our data
17
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
also revealed that the mutation of Tyr366 from lobe-II largely decreases the affinity of both
GABA and baclofen. This mutant subunit is correctly expressed and targeted to the plasma
membrane when associated with the wild-type GABAB2 subunit, as shown by its activation by
GABA which is to an extent similar to that obtained with the wild-type receptor. This large
decrease in affinity suggests therefore, that Tyr366 has either direct or indirect contact with these
agonists. Such an interaction does not appear to be possible in our 3D model for an open form of
the GABAB1 binding domain. However, in a closed form model, the hydroxyphenyl of Tyr366
points towards the GABA binding site in lobe-I, and its oxygen forms a H-bond with the
carboxylic group of baclofen. Further experiments are required to validate this possibility.
However, these data already show that residues in lobe-II affect the affinity of agonists, in
agreement with the observation that residues from both lobes contact the ligands in many PBP-
like proteins (16, 19, 39-41). Interestingly, this mutation also prevents baclofen from activating
the heteromeric receptor, and converts it into a competitive antagonist. In our 3D model, the
chlorophenyl group of baclofen points towards a pocket lined by the hydroxyphenyl group of
Tyr366. It is therefore possible that the replacement of this Tyr by an Ala changes the position
of surrounding residues such that the chlorophenyl group in no longer accepted in a closed-
active conformation of the binding domain, therefore converting baclofen into an antagonist.
Although additional work is required to demonstrate this hypothesis, it is interesting to note that
a mutation in lobe-II, lining the binding pocket of AmiC, converts the bulky butyramide from an
antagonist to an agonist (46).
The GABAB receptor requires the presence of two subunits, GABAB1 and GABAB2 for
its full activity. Although one role of GABAB2 is to allow the correct insertion of GABAB1 in
the plasma membrane (28, 44), other roles in receptor functioning have not yet been
characterized. Our data show a correlation between the affinity of both GABA and baclofen
measured in binding studies on wild-type or mutant GABAB1 receptors and their EC50 values
measured in a functional assay after co-expression with GABAB2 receptor. Moreover, the
mutation of Asp471, a residue that is likely to play a critical role in GABA binding according to
our modeling studies, suppresses the function of the heteromer. Finally, a single mutation in the
GABAB1 subunit is sufficient to convert the selective heteromeric GABAB receptor agonist
18
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
baclofen into an antagonist. Taken together, and in agreement with recent additional data (47),
these results add further strength to the proposal that GABA binding on the GABAB1 subunit is
required and is the main determinant for the activation of the heteromer. Comparison of the
putative binding pocket of GABAB1 and GABAB2 reveals that although Asp471 of GABAB1
is conserved in GABAB2, Tyr366 and Ser246 are replaced by Asp and Pro in GABAB2
respectively (see Fig. 1b). The mutation of Ser246 into Pro in GABAB1 is sufficient to suppress
the action of GABA on the heteromer. However, GABA and baclofen have been shown to
occasionally activate the GABAB2 receptor expressed alone (25, 48), suggesting that the
GABAB2 receptor is able to bind these two agonists. Our data indicate that if GABA and baclofen bind
to the GABAB2 subunit, they have to do it in a different way from GABAB1.
In conclusion, our data strongly support the importance of lobe-I for binding properties of
agonists in family 3 heptahelix receptors. They also reveal that residues in lobe-II can be critical
for the agonist property of family 3 receptor ligands. This is consistent with the proposal that the
closure of the two lobes (the so-called Venus fly-trap mechanism of action (19)) constitutes a
key step in family 3 receptor activation.
Acknowledgements - The authors express their special thanks to Drs. M.-L.
Parmentier, F. Acher, G. Labesse and J. Bockaert for constant support and
constructive discussion all along this work. The authors wish to thank Mss. F.
Gaven and A. Boncompain for their help for some experiments. Drs. F. Quiocho
(Houston, Texas, U.S.A.) and P. O’Hara (ZymoGenetics Inc, Seattle, Washington,
U.S.A.) are acknowledged for the coordinates of the closed form model of LIVBP.
We thank Drs. B. Mouillac, T. Durroux, A. Dumuis, C. De Colle and F. Carroll
(CCIPE, Montpellier, France) for critical reading of the manuscript.
19
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
References
1 Bockaert, J., and Pin, J.-P. (1999) EMBO J. 18, 1723-1729
2 Conn, P., and Pin, J.-P. (1997) Ann. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 37, 205-237
3 Brown, E. M., Gamba, G., Riccardi, D., Lombardi, M., Butters, R., Kifor, O., Sun, A.,
Hediger, M. A., Lytton, J., and Hebert, S. C. (1993) Nature 366, 575-580
4 Speca, D. J., Lin, D. M., Sorensen, P. W., Isacoff, E. Y., Ngai, J., and Dittman, A. H. (1999)
Neuron 23, 487-98
5 Hoon, M. A., Adler, E., Lindemeier, J., Battey, J. F., Ryba, N. J., and Zuker, C. S. (1999)
Cell 96, 541-51
6 Matsunami, H., and Buck, L. B. (1997) Cell 90, 775-784
7 Herrada, G., and Dulac, C. (1997) Cell 90, 763-773
8 Okamoto, T., Sekiyama, N., Otsu, M., Shimada, Y., Sato, A., Nakanishi, S., and Jingami, H.
(1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 13089-13096
9 Han, G., and Hampson, D. R. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 10008-10013
10 Malitschek, B., Schweizer, C., Keir, M., Heid, J., Froestl, W., Mosbacher, J., Kuhn, R.,
Henley, J., Joly, C., Pin, J.-P., Kaupmann, K., and Bettler, B. (1999) Mol. Pharmacol.
56, 448-454
11 Pin, J.-P., De Colle, C., Bessis, A.-S., and Acher, F. (1999) Eur. J. Pharmacol. 375, 277-
294
12 Costantino, G., and Pellicciari, R. (1996) J Med Chem 39, 3998-4006
13 O’Hara, P. J., Sheppard, P. O., Thøgersen, H., Venezia, D., Haldeman, B. A., McGrane, V.,
Houamed, K. M., Thomsen, C., Gilbert, T. L., and Mulvihill, E. R. (1993) Neuron 11,
41-52
14 Hampson, D. R., Huang, X. P., Pekhletski, R., Peltekova, V., Hornby, G., Thomsen, C., and
Thogersen, H. (1999) J Biol Chem 274, 33488-95
15 Galvez, T., Parmentier, M.-L., Joly, C., Malitschek, B., Kaupmann, K., Kuhn, R., Bittiger,
H., Froestl, W., Bettler, B., and Pin, J.-P. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 13362-13369
16 Pearl, L., O’Hara, B., Drew, R., and Wilson, S. (1994) EMBO J 13, 5810-5817
20
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
17 Tam, R., and Saier, M. H. (1993) Microbiol. Rev. 57, 320-346
18 Sack, J. S., Saper, M. A., and Quiocho, F. A. (1989) J. Mol. Biol. 206, 171-191
19 Quiocho, F. A. (1990) Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 326, 341-351
20 Bräuner-Osborne, H., Jensen, A. A., Sheppard, P. O., O’Hara, P., and Krogsgaard-Larsen,
P. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 18382-18386
21 Bai, M., Trivedi, S., Kifor, O., Quinn, S. J., and Brown, E. M. (1999) Proc Natl Acad Sci U
S A 96, 2834-9
22 Romano, C., Yang, W.-L., and O’Malley, K. L. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 28612-28616
23 Jones, K. A., Borowsky, B., Tamm, J. A., Craig, D. A., Durkin, M. M., Dai, M., Yao, W.-J.,
Johnson, M., Gunwaldsen, C., Huang, L.-Y., Tang, C., Shen, Q., Salon, J. A., Morse, K.,
Laz, T., Smith, K. E., Nagarathnam, D., Noble, S. A., Branchek, T. A., and Gerald, C.
(1998) Nature 396, 674-679
24 Kaupmann, K., Huggel, K., Heid, J., Flor, P. J., Bischoff, S., Mickel, S. J., McMaster, G.,
Angst, C., Bittiger, H., Froestl, W., and Bettler, B. (1997) Nature 386, 239-246
25 Kaupmann, K., Malitschek, B., Schuler, V., Heid, J., Froestl, W., Beck, P., Mosbacher, J.,
Bischoff, S., Kulik, A., Shigemoto, R., Karschin, A., and Bettler, B. (1998) Nature 396,
683-687
26 Kuner, R., Kohr, G., Grunewald, S., Eisenhardt, G., Bach, A., and Kornau, H. C. (1999)
Science 283, 74-77
27 Ng, G. Y., Clark, J., Coulombe, N., Ethier, N., Hebert, T. E., Sullivan, R., Kargman, S.,
Chateauneuf, A., Tsukamoto, N., McDonald, T., Whiting, P., Mezey, E., Johnson, M. P.,
Liu, Q., Kolakowski, L. F., Jr., Evans, J. F., Bonner, T. I., and O’Neill, G. P. (1999) J.
Biol. Chem. 274, 7607-10
28 White, J. H., Wise, A., Main, M. J., Green, A., Fraser, N. J., Disney, G. H., Barnes, A. A.,
Emson, P., Foord, S. M., and Marshall, F. H. (1998) Nature 396, 679-682
29 Kaupmann, K., Bettler, B., Bettiger, H., Froestl, W., and Mickel, S. J. (1997) PCT Patent
WO 97/46675 A1
30 Froestl, W., Mickel, S. J., Hall, R. G., von Sprecher, G., Strub, D., Baumann, P. A., Brugger,
F., Gentsch, C., Jaekel, J., Olpe, H.-R., Rihs, G., Vassout, A., Waldmeier, P. C., and
21
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
Bittiger, H. (1995) J. Med. Chem. 38, 3297-3312
31 Gomeza, J., Mary, S., Brabet, I., Parmentier, M.-L., Restituito, S., Bockaert, J., and Pin, J.-
P. (1996) Mol. Pharmacol. 50, 923-930
32 Conklin, B. R., Farfel, Z., Lustig, K. D., Julius, D., and Bourne, H. R. (1993) Nature 363,
274-276
33 Malitschek, B., Ruegg, D., Heid, J., Kaupmann, K., Bittiger, H., Froestl, W., Bettler, B., and
Kuhn, R. (1998) Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 12, 56-64
34 Sali, A., and Blundell, T. (1993) J Mol Biol 234, 779-815
35 Luthy, R., Bowie, J. U., and Eisenberg, D. (1992) Nature 356, 83-85
36 Isomoto, S., Kaibara, M., Sakurai-Yamashita, Y., Nagayama, Y., Uezono, Y., Yano, K., and
Taniyama, K. (1998) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Com. 253, 10-15
37 Pfaff, T., Malitschek, B., Kaupmann, K., Prézeau, L., Pin, J.-P., Bettler, B., and Karschin,
A. (1999) Eur. J. Neurosci. 11, 2874-2882
38 Franek, M., Pagano, A., Kaupmann, K., Bettler, B., Pin, J.-P., and Blahos II, J. (1999)
Neuropharmacology 38, 1657-1666
39 Yao, N., Trakhanov, S., and Quiocho, F. A. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 4769-79
40 Oh, B.-H., Pandit, J., Kang, C.-H., Nikaido, K., Gokcen, S., Ames, G. F.-L., and Kim, S.-
H. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 11348-11355
41 Armstrong, N., Sun, Y., Chen, G. Q., and Gouaux, E. (1998) Nature 395, 913-7
42 Olah, G. A., Trakhanov, S. D., Trewhella, J., and Quiocho, F. A. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268,
16241+16247
43 Galvez, T., Urwyler, S., Prézeau, L., Mosbacher, J., Joly, C., Malitschek, B., Heid, J.,
Brabet, I., Froestl, W., Bettler, B., Kaupmann, K., and Pin, J.-P. (2000) Mol. Pharmacol.
57, 419-426
44 Couve, A., Filippov, A. K., Connolly, C. N., Bettler, B., Brown, D. A., and Moss, S. J.
(1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 26361
45 Jensen, A. A., Sheppard, P. O., O’Hara, P. J., Krogsgaard-Larsen, P., and Brauner-Osborne,
H. (2000) Eur J Pharmacol 397, 247-253
46 O’Hara, B. P., Wilson, S. A., Lee, A. W., Roe, S. M., Siligardi, G., Drew, R. E., and Pearl,
22
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
L. H. (2000) Protein Eng 13, 129-32
47 Sullivan, R., Chateauneuf, A., Coulombe, N., Kolakowski, L. F., Jr., Johnson, M. P., Hebert,
T. E., Ethier, N., Belley, M., Metters, K., Abramovitz, M., O’Neill, G. P., and Ng, G. Y.
(2000) J Pharmacol Exp Ther 293, 460-7
48 Martin, S. C., Russek, S. J., and Farb, D. H. (1999) Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 13, 180-91
23
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
FOOT NOTES
1 The abbreviations used are: AmiC, Regulatory subunit of the amidase operon from P.
aeruginosa; CaS, Ca2+-sensing; GABA, γ-amino-n-butyric acid; GABAB , γ-aminobutyric
acid type B; LBP, leucine-binding protein; LIVBP, leucine/isoleucine/valine-binding protein;
mGlu, metabotropic glutamate; PBPs, periplasmic binding proteins.
24
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
FIGURE LEGENDS
Figure 1: Regions and residues of the GABAB1a receptor binding site selected for mutagenesis.
a) Ribbon view of a 3D model of the extracellular GABAB1 receptor domain constructed based
on the structure of the open form of LIVBP and LBP. The regions selected for mutagenesis are
shown in yellow. b) Sequence of the regions selected for mutagenesis in GABAB1 receptor
aligned with the corresponding regions of mGlu receptors, GABAB2 receptor, LIVBP, LBP and
the AmiC protein. Residues that interact with leucine in LIVBP, and with acetamide in AmiC,
and those proposed to interact with glutamate in mGlu receptors are highlighted in black.
Residues which have been mutated in GABAB1 receptor are in bold. Residues of GABAB1a
receptor identified are being critical for agonist binding (Ser246 and Asp471) and baclofen
activity (Tyr366) are highlighted in black. Residues underlined correspond to the number
indicated on top of the sequence.
Figure 2: Structure of the GABAB ligands used in this study.
Figure 3: The binding affinities of GABA on several GABAB1 receptor mutants correlates with
their EC50 values determined on the heteromeric receptor containing the GABAB1 receptor
mutant and the wild-type GABAB2 receptor. The GABA binding affinity (IC50 values not
different from Kd according to our experimental conditions) on the indicated GABAB1 receptor
mutants was determined by displacement of [125I]-CGP64213 binding. The EC50 value of
GABA in stimulating IP formation was determined using cells expressing the indicated
GABAB1 receptor mutant together with the wild-type GABAB2 receptor and the mutated G-protein
Gqi9. The correlation observed is highly significant. Values are means of several experiments
and were taken from table I. A similar correlation was also observed with baclofen (data not
shown).
Figure 4: Effect of some mutations on the specific binding of [125I]-CGP64213 (a) and on the
25
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
expression level of the protein after transient expression in HEK 293 cells (b). In a) 10 µg of
membrane proteins were used and the specific binding of [125I]-CGP64213 was measured
using 1 nM of this radioligand. In b) 10 µg of membrane proteins were used and the GABAB1
receptor protein was detected using an antibody directed against its C-terminus. Results are from
one experiment representative of at least two others.
Figure 5: The mutation of Ser246 into either Ala, Pro or Asn dramatically affects GABA and
baclofen affinities. Typical dose effect of GABA (a) and baclofen (b) in stimulating IP formation
in cells expressing the indicated GABAB1 receptor mutant together with the wild-type
GABAB2 receptor and the mutated G-protein Gqi9. Values are means ± s.e.m. of triplicate determinations
taken from a typical experiment.
Figure 6: The mutation of Asp471 into either Ala or Glu inhibits agonist activities of both GABA
and baclofen. Typical dose effect of GABA (a) and baclofen (b) in stimulating IP formation in
cells expressing the indicated GABAB1 receptor mutant, the wild-type GABAB2 receptor and
the mutated G-protein Gqi9. In (c), the D471A mutant is shown to be correctly targeted to the
cell surface when co-expressed with the wild-type GABAB2 receptor. After biotinylation of the
cell surface proteins, the total amount GABAB1 receptor protein (lane 1) or the amount bound
(lane 3) or not (lane 2) to the streptavidin beads was estimated by western blotting. The
experiment was conducted with cells expressing GABAB1 receptor (BR1) alone or co-
expressed with GABAB2 receptor (BR2), the D471A mutant alone or co-expressed with
GABAB2 receptor. Note that a higher amount of GABAB1 receptor or D471A proteins were biotinylated
(and therefore located at the cell surface) when co-expressed with GABAB2 receptor.
Figure 7: The mutation of Tyr366 in GABAB1 receptor decreases GABA affinity and converts
baclofen into an antagonist. a) Displacement of [125I]-CGP64213 binding from the wild-type
GABAB1 receptor (open symbols) or from the Y366A mutant (closed symbols) with GABA
(circles) or baclofen (squares). b) Stimulation of IP production by GABA (circles) or baclofen
(squares) in cells expressing wild-type GABAB1 receptor (open symbols) or the Y366A mutant
26
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
(closed symbols) with the GABAB2 receptor and the Gqi9 chimera. c) Effect of various
concentration of GABA applied alone (closed circles) or in the presence of 5 mM baclofen
(open circles) on the stimulation of IP production in cells expressing Y366A with GABAB2
receptor. Data are means ± s.e.m. of triplicate determinations from a typical experiment (each
repeated at least 3 times with similar results), and are expressed as percentage of the [125I]-
CGP64213 specific binding (a), or percentage of the maximal effect obtained with 10 mM
GABA (b, c).
Figure 8: Ribbon views of the 3D models of putative open (a) and closed (b) conformations of
the GABAB1 receptor binding domain (the insertion comprising residues 488 to 502 is not
shown in (a)). Close view of the cleft that separate the two lobes in the open (c) and closed (d)
conformation. In (c) and (d) the residues identified as being important for GABA and baclofen
action (Ser246, Asp471 and Tyr366) are shown. Baclofen docked on the closed conformation is
shown in panel d. A closer view of baclofen in its binding pocket in the model of the closed
conformation of the GABAB1 receptor, showing the ionic interaction between the amino group
of baclofen with the side chain of Asp471, and the H-bonds of the carboxylic group of baclofen
with the side chain of Ser246.
Figure 9: Differences and similarities in the ligand binding pocket of LIVBP, GABAB1 receptor
and mGlu1 receptor.
27
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
Table I: Effect of various mutations in GABAB1 receptor on the affinity of both GABA and
baclofen as determined by displacement of [125I]-CGP64213 binding (IC50 in µM) and receptor
activation (EC50 in µM).
mutation GABA baclofen CGP binding IP assay CGP binding IP assay IC50 (µM) EC50 (µM) IC50 (µM) EC50 (µM)
WT 22.3 ± 1.9 2.9 ± 0.6 30 ± 2 5.0 ± 1.3
lobe-I
S246A N.B. a >1000 N.B. >1000 S246P N.B. N.E. N.B. N.E. S246T N.B. >1000 N.B. - S246N N.B. N.E. N.B. N.E.
loops S247A 5.32 ± 0.88 a 0.37 ± 0.09 b 11.3 ± 0.9 b 0.38 ± 0.04 bβC-αIII S249A 26.2 ± 13.3 a - - -
& T250A 36.4 ± 12.8 a - - -βD-βE S265A N.B. 1.9±0.4 N.B. -
Y266F N.B. 3.9 ± 1.3 N.B. 18.3 ± 5.1 S268A 27.8 ± 3.4 a 1.02 ± 0.15 b 43.0 ± 4.1 b 0.91 ± 0.41 b S269A 238 ± 63 a 14.9 ± 0.8 b 28.8 ± 5.4 b 1.78 ± 0.22 b S270A 406 ± 26 a 24.5 ± 8.1 332 ± 1 51 ± 11
C187A 36.8 ± 3.6 a 1.8±0.3 - - E192A 22.3 ± 6.6 - - - E458A 16.5 ± 0.8 a - - - E459A 35.0 ± 0.1 a - - -
helices T460A 42.1 ± 4.7 a - - -αI & αIX F463A N.B. 3.23 ± 0.67 N.B. 12.6 ± 1.0
Q464A 29.3 ± 7.6 a - - - E465A 63 ± 28 114 ± 30 - 78.0 ± 5.5 Y470A N.B. a 1.74 ± 0.69 N.B. - Y470F N.B. 0.96 ± 0.47 N.B. - D471A N.B. N.E. N.B. N.E. D471E N.B. N.E. N.B. N.E.
lobe-II
Q312A 4.1 ± 0.9 a 0.51 ± 0.21 8.0 ± 1.4 a 1.04 ± 0.16loop Q313A 13.4 ± 0.8 a - - -
βF-αVI T314A 9.9 ± 3.6 a - - -
T315A 43.6 ± 1.5 a - - - E316A 61.1 ± 17.3 a - - -
loop F365A 17.6 ± 0.1 8.2± 6.1 30.8±4.5 2.6±0.7βH-αVII Y366A 3420 ± 522 97.1 ± 5.2 1559 ± 28 ANTAGO
E367A 35.4 ± 8.2 6.35 ± 4.25 14.9±3.2 28.0±0.6
Mutants highlighted in bold are those we proposed to be critical for agonist binding and action.
N.B.: specific [125I]-CGP64213 is less than 10% of that measured on membranes expressing
the wild-type receptor. N.E.: no significant stimulation of IP formation with 1 mM of the
agonist. a and b: values are taken from (15) and (43), respectively.
28
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
Jean-Philippe R. PinWolfgang Froestl, Bernhard Bettler, Hugues-Olivier Bertrand, Jaroslav Blahos and Thierry C. Galvez, Laurent Prezeau, Gerald Milioti, Miloslav Franek, Cecile Joly,
activation process of GABAB receptorsMapping the agonist binding site of GABAB Type 1 subunit sheds light on the
published online September 13, 2000J. Biol. Chem.
10.1074/jbc.M007848200Access the most updated version of this article at doi:
Alerts:
When a correction for this article is posted•
When this article is cited•
to choose from all of JBC's e-mail alertsClick here
by guest on January 31, 2018http://w
ww
.jbc.org/D
ownloaded from
Recommended