 |
The Journal of Neuroscience, February 15, 2006, 26(7):2031-2040; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4555-05.2006
Previous Article | Next Article 
Cellular/Molecular
Charged Residues in the 1 and 2 Pre-M1 Regions Involved in GABAA Receptor Activation
Jose Mercado and
Cynthia Czajkowski
Department of Physiology and Neuroscience Training Program, University of WisconsinMadison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
For Cys-loop ligand-gated ion channels (LGIC), the protein movements that couple neurotransmitter binding to channel gating are not well known. The pre-M1 region, which links the extracellular agonist-binding domain to the channel-containing transmembrane domain, is in an ideal position to transduce binding site movements to gating movements. A cluster of cationic residues in this region is observed in all LGIC subunits, and in particular, an arginine residue is absolutely conserved. We mutated charged pre-M1 residues in the GABAA receptor 1 (K219, R220, K221) and 2 (K213, K215, R216) subunits to cysteine and expressed the mutant subunits with wild-type 2 or 1 in Xenopus oocytes. Cysteine substitution of 2R216 abolished channel gating by GABA without altering the binding of the GABA agonist [3H]muscimol, indicating that this residue plays a key role in coupling GABA binding to gating. Tethering thiol-reactive methanethiosulfonate (MTS) reagents onto 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C increased maximal GABA-activated currents, suggesting that structural perturbations of the pre-M1 regions affect channel gating. GABA altered the rates of sulfhydryl modification of 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C, indicating that the pre-M1 regions move in response to channel activation. A positively charged MTS reagent modified 2K213C and 2K215C significantly faster than a negatively charged reagent, and GABA activation eliminated modification of 2K215C by the negatively charged reagent. Overall, the data indicate that the pre-M1 region is part of the structural machinery coupling GABA binding to gating and that the transduction of binding site movements to channel movements is mediated, in part, by electrostatic interactions.
Key words: GABA; GABAA receptor; pre-M1 region; substituted cysteine accessibility method; electrostatic interactions; allosteric protein; ligand-gated ion channel
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
For ligand-gated ion channels (LGIC), neurotransmitter binding triggers a series of conformational movements that ultimately lead to channel opening. Because the neurotransmitter binding site resides on the extracellular surface of the protein and the channel gate is located in the transmembrane domain (TMD), the local changes that occur at the binding site when neurotransmitter binds must be propagated to distant parts of the receptor protein. Although much is known about the structure of the Cys-loop superfamily of LGICs from the recent 4 Å resolution model of the Torpedo nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) (Unwin, 2005 ) and the crystallographic structure of the related acetylcholine binding protein (AChBP) (Brejc et al., 2001 ; Celie et al., 2004 ), these structures alone cannot describe the protein dynamics involved in coupling neurotransmitter binding to channel gating.
The N-terminal region of the first transmembrane domain (pre-M1), a region that structurally links the extracellular ligand binding domain (LBD) to the transmembrane channel domain, is in an ideal position to transduce binding site movements in the extracellular domain to gating movements in the membrane domains. It physically links -strand 10, which forms part of loop C of the binding site, to the first transmembrane -helix M1. In addition, a cluster of cationic residues in this region is observed in all LGIC subunits, and in particular, the arginine at 2216 of the GABAA receptor (GABAAR) and aligned positions is absolutely conserved (see Fig. 1), suggesting that charge interactions may play a role in coupling ligand binding to channel gating. Here, we used the substituted cysteine accessibility method to examine the electrostatic environment and dynamics of the pre-M1 region of the GABAA receptor during channel activation.
Charged amino acid residues in the pre-M1 regions of the 1 and 2 subunits of the GABAA receptor were individually mutated to cysteine. The rates these cysteines were modified by sulfhydryl-specific methanethiosulfonate (MTS) reagents were measured in unliganded (resting) and GABA-bound receptor states (open/desensitized) to determine whether structural movements occur in the pre-M1 region during channel activation. In addition, we used MTS reagents of different charge to monitor the electrostatic environment near the pre-M1 region.
We demonstrate that both the 1 and 2 pre-M1 regions undergo structural rearrangements during channel activation, as expected if this region is an important transduction element coupling binding to gating. Moreover, we provide evidence that mutation of the conserved arginine residue at position 216 in the 2 subunit to cysteine uncouples agonist binding from gating. Oocytes expressing 1 2R216C receptors had no functional response to GABA but specifically bound the GABA agonist [3H]muscimol to similar levels as wild-type receptors. Differences in the accessibility and the functional effects of oppositely charged MTS compounds suggest that unliganded and liganded receptor state stabilization is mediated, in part, by electrostatic forces. Overall, the data indicate that the pre-M1 region is part of the structural machinery linking binding site movements to channel gating movements.
 |
Materials and Methods
|
|---|
Mutagenesis.
Rat cDNAs encoding 1 and 2 GABAA receptor subunits were used for all molecular cloning and functional studies. Cysteine mutants were made using either the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) or by recombinant PCR, as described previously (Boileau et al., 1999 ). Mutagenic oligonucleotides were synthesized to introduce the desired mutation, and a silent restriction site was used to screen for the desired mutations. All mutant cDNA was verified by double-stranded cDNA sequencing to confirm that the desired point mutations was present and that the cDNA was free of additional mutations.
Expression in Xenopus laevis oocytes.
Oocytes were prepared as described previously (Boileau et al., 1998 ). Capped cRNAs encoding the 1, 2, 1K219C, 1R220C, 1K221C, 2K213C, 2K215C, and 2R216C subunits in the vector pGH19 (Liman et al., 1992 ; Robertson et al., 1996 ) were transcribed in vitro using the mMessage mMachine T7 kit (Ambion, Austin, TX). Single oocytes were injected within 24 h with 27 nl of cRNA (10 ng/µl per subunit) in a ratio of 1:1. Oocytes were incubated at 18°C in ND96 (in mM: 96 NaCl, 2 KCl, 1 MgCl2, 1.8 CaCl2, and 5 HEPES, pH 7.2), supplemented with 100 µg/ml gentamycin and 100 µg/ml BSA, for 214 d before use.
Two-electrode voltage clamp.
Oocytes were perfused continuously at a rate of 5 ml/min with ND96 while being held under two-electrode voltage clamp at 80 mV. The bath volume was 200 µl. Stock solutions of GABA (Sigma, St. Louis, MO), muscimol (Sigma), and pentobarbital (Research Biochemicals, Natick, MA) were prepared fresh in ND96. Borosilicate electrodes (Warner Instruments, Hamden, CT) were filled with 3 M KCl and had resistances between 0.7 and 2 M . Electrophysiological data were acquired with a GeneClamp 500 (Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA) interfaced to a computer with an ITC16 analog-to-digital device (Instrutech, Great Neck, NY) and recorded using the Whole Cell program, version 3.2.9 (kindly provided by J. Demspter, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK).
Concentrationresponse analysis.
Concentrationresponse experiments were performed as described previously (Boileau and Czajkowski, 1999 ). In brief, GABA concentrationresponses were scaled to a low, nondesensitizing concentration of GABA (EC2 to EC10) applied just before the test concentration to correct for any slow drift in IGABA responsiveness over the course of the experiment. Currents elicited by each test concentration were normalized to the corresponding low concentration current before curve fitting. GraphPad (San Diego, CA) Prism 4 software was used for data analysis and fitting. Concentrationresponse data were fit to the following equation: I = Imax/(1 + (EC50/[A])n), where I is the peak response to a given concentration of GABA, Imax is the maximum amplitude of current, [A] is the agonist concentration, and n is the Hill coefficient.
Modification of introduced cysteine residues by MTS reagents.
Three derivatives of methanethiosulfonate (CH3SO2X) were used to covalently modify the introduced cysteines: MTS-N-biotinylaminoethyl [X = SCH2CH2NH-biotin (MTSEA-biotin)], MTS-ethyltrimethylammonium [X = SCH2CH2N(CH3)3+ (MTSET+)], and MTS-ethylsulfonate [X = SCH2CH2 SO3 (MTSES)] (Biotium, Hayward, CA). Stocks solutions (100 mM) were made in DMSO for all MTS reagents, aliquoted into microcentrifuge tubes, and rapidly frozen on ice before storage at 20°C. For each application of MTS reagent, a new aliquot was thawed, diluted in ND96 to the working concentration, and used immediately to avoid hydrolysis of the MTS compound. The final DMSO concentrations were 2%. These solvent concentrations did not affect GABAA receptor functional responses.
MTS modifications of the engineered cysteines were assayed by measuring changes in GABA-evoked current (IGABA). The effects of MTSEA-biotin, MTSET+, and MTSES were studied using the following protocol: GABA (EC4060) current responses (1030 s) were measured from oocytes expressing wild-type ( 1 2) or mutant receptors and stabilized. Stability was defined as <5% variance of peak current responses to GABA on two consecutive applications. After stabilization, the MTS reagent (2 mM) was bath applied for 2 min, followed by a 57 min wash, and then IGABA was measured at the same concentration as before the MTS treatment. The effect of the MTS application was calculated as follows: [((Iafter/Iinitial) 1) x 100], where Iafter is the peak GABA current elicited after the MTS application and Iinitial is the peak current before MTS. Maximal IGABA was also measured, before and after MTS application using 10 and 300 mM GABA. In these cases, the time interval between GABA applications was 912 min to allow complete recovery from desensitization.
Rate of MTS modification.
The rates at which the various MTS reagents modified the engineered cysteines were determined by measuring the effect of sequential applications of low concentrations of MTS reagents on IGABA, as described previously (Holden and Czajkowski, 2002 ). The protocol is described as follows: EC4060 GABA was applied for 10 s every 35 min until IGABA stabilized (<3% variance). After a 40 s ND96 washout, MTS reagents were applied for 520 s, and the cell was then washed for an additional 2.54.5 min. The procedure was repeated until IGABA no longer changed, indicating that the reaction had proceeded to apparent completion. Concentration of MTS reagent and time of application varied as follows: 1K219C: MTSEA-biotin, 10 µM, 20 s; 1K221C: MTSEA-biotin, 10 µM, 20 s; MTSES, 300 µM, 20 s; 2K213C: MTSET+, 30 µM, 20 s; MTSES, 500 µM, 20 s; 2K215C: MTSET+, 30 µM, 20 s; MTSES, 300 µM, 20 s. The effects of GABA on the rate of MTS modification were measured by coapplying GABA (EC8090) with the MTS reagent. For these experiments, IGABA was stabilized as follows: EC4060 GABA was applied for 10 s, washed for 40 s; EC8090 GABA was applied for 520 s, washed for 2.55 min. The procedure was repeated until IGABA from EC4060 GABA was within <3% of the previous IGABA peak. This ensured complete washout of the drug and that any alteration in the current amplitudes after MTS treatment was the result of MTS modification. Concentrations of MTS reagents and times of applications in the presence of GABA (EC8090) were as follows: 1K219C: MTSEA-biotin, 30 µM, 20 s; 1K221C: MTSEA-biotin, 10 µM, 20 s; 2K213C: MTSET+, 30 or 60 µM, 10 s; 2K215C: MTSET+, 30 µM, 10 s.
For all rate experiments, the decrease or increase in GABA-induced current was plotted versus cumulative time of MTS exposure. Peak current at each time point was normalized to the initial peak current (t = 0) and fit to a single exponential function using GraphPad Prism software. A pseudo-first-order rate constant (k1) was determined, and a second-order rate constant (k2) was calculated by dividing k1 by the concentration of the MTS reagent used (Pascual and Karlin, 1998 ).
[3H]Muscimol single oocyte binding.
For binding experiments, the concentration of cRNA injected was 5.4 ng per subunit. Intact oocytes were washed twice with PBS (in mM: 137.93 NaCl, 2.67 KCl, 1.5 KH2PO4, and 8 Na2HPO4·7H2O, pH 7.1). To measure total [3H]muscimol binding sites, intact oocytes (8 or 10) were incubated on ice in PBS with 150 nM [3H]muscimol (15.7 Ci/mmol; DuPont NEN, Boston, MA) in triplicate (final volume, 0.5 ml). Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence of 100 µM muscimol. After a 1 h incubation on ice, the samples were vacuum filtered over GF/B glass microfiber filters (Whatman, Clifton, NJ) using a Hoefer Scientific (San Francisco, CA) vacuum box (model FH224) and washed four times with 5 ml of ice-cold PBS. The filters and oocytes were mixed thoroughly with 4 ml of scintillation fluid, and the radioactivity (in counts per minute) was determined. Specific binding was defined as the amount of [3H]muscimol bound in the absence of displacing ligand (total) minus the amount bound in the presence of 100 µM muscimol (nonspecific).
Statistical analysis.
Log (EC50) values, changes in GABA EC50 and maximal response after MTS modification, and second-order (k2) rates were analyzed generally using a one-way ANOVA, followed by a post hoc Dunnetts test to determine the level of significance between wild-type and mutant receptors. Comparison of the second-order (k2) rates of covalent modification of 2K213C and 2K215C in the absence and presence of GABA were performed using Students one-tailed paired t test. Alterations in GABA EC50 resulting from MTS treatment were analyzed using Students two-tailed paired t test.
Structural modeling.
A model of the extracellular LBD of the GABAA receptor was built based on the structure of the AChBP (Brejc et al., 2001 ). The crystal structure of the AChBP was downloaded from Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics Protein Data Bank (code 1I9B
[PDB]
) and loaded into Swiss Protein Bank Viewer (SPDBV; http://www.expasy.org/spdbv/). The rat 1 mature protein sequence from Thr12 to Ile227, the 2 protein sequence from Ser10 to Leu218, and the 2 protein sequence from Gly25 to Arg231 were aligned with the AChBP primary amino acid sequence as depicted by Cromer et al. (2002) and threaded onto the AChBP tertiary structure using the "Interactive Magic Fit" function of SPDBV. The threaded subunits were imported into SYBYL (Tripos, St. Louis, MO), where energy minimization was performed. SYBYL minimizations terminate when the number of iterations is reached or if the gradient change reaches 0.05 kcal/Å·mol. The first 100 iterations were performed using Simplex minimization (Press et al., 1998 ) followed by 1000 iterations using the Powell conjugate gradient method (Powell, 1977 ). A GABAA receptor LBD ( : : : : viewed counterclockwise from the synaptic cleft) was assembled by overlaying the monomeric subunits on the AChBP scaffold, and the resulting structure was imported into SYBYL and energy minimized. Neither water nor entropy factors were included during the minimizations. After the global energy minimization, Ramachandran plots, plots, side-chain positions, and cis and trans bonds were all examined. The program PROCHECK (Laskowski et al., 1996 ) was run to examine structural features against the established database of protein parameters, most importantly the / torsions and side-chain conformations. Problems in the structure that were revealed by these evaluations were fixed manually, and energy minimizations were run again as needed. Regions with insertions were modeled by fitting structures from a loop database. Because the sequence identity of the AChBP and the GABAA receptor LBD is only 18%, caution must be used in interpreting the absolute positions of individual side-chain residues in the model.
The structure of the nAChR transmembrane domain at 4 Å resolution solved by Miyazawa et al. (2003) (PDB 1OED
[PDB]
) was used to model the pore-containing TMDs of the GABAA receptor. The GABAA receptor TMD sequences were aligned with the nAChR TMD sequences and the amino acids from the 1, 2, and 2 subunits of the GABAAR were substituted for residues in the / , , and nAChR subunits, respectively. The TMD of each subunit was built and energy minimized individually using the Tripos force field program in SYBYL. A GABAA receptor TMD pentamer was assembled by overlaying the monomeric subunits on the nAChR scaffold, and the resulting structure was imported into SYBYL and energy minimized as described above.
A model of the entire GABAA receptor (LBD plus TMD) was built by physically docking the LBD model with the TMD model using the fivefold axes as a docking guide. The domains were rotated so that their relative positions to one another were consistent with published experimental data. The TMD N-terminal and the LBD C-terminal residues were joined and energy minimized while fixing the rest of the molecule. This was followed by an energy minimization of the entire structure in three stages. The first stage used the Simplex method for 20 cycles before switching to the Tripos force field for 1000 iterations. Finally, the third stage again used the Tripos force field with >1000 cycles, or a convergence of <0.05 kcal/Å·mol. After the global energy minimization, Ramachandran plots, plots, side-chain positions, and cis and trans bonds were all examined. The program PROCHECK (Laskowski et al., 1996 ) was run to examine structural features against the established database of protein parameters, most importantly the / torsions and side-chain conformations. Problems in the structure that were revealed by these evaluations were fixed manually and energy minimizations were run again as needed. Although the resulting model is reasonable, the packing of the loops at the interface of the LBD and TMD as well as the positions of residue side-chains need to be interpreted with care.
 |
Results
|
|---|
Functional characterization of pre-M1 mutant receptors
Three charged residues in the 1 subunit (K219, R220, and K221) and in the 2 subunit (K213, K215, and R216) were mutated to cysteine in the pre-M1 region (Fig. 1). Oocytes were injected with each of the mutant subunits, wild-type 2, or 1 and were assayed for GABA responsiveness using two-electrode voltage clamp. GABA elicited currents (IGABA) from oocytes expressing 1K219C 2, 1K221C 2, 1 2K213C, and 1 2K215C receptors, indicating that these cysteine substitutions were tolerated and yielded functional receptors. The GABA EC50 and Hill coefficient values were not significantly different from wild-type values (EC50 = 6.9 ± 0.7 µM; nH = 1.0 ± 0.1) (Fig. 2, Table 1). Oocytes expressing 1K219C 2, 1K221C 2, 1 2K213C, and 1 2K215C receptors elicited maximal macroscopic currents similar to wild-type receptors (2130 ± 885 nA; n = 8).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Aligned amino acid sequences of the pre-M1 and adjacent regions of the rat (R) GABAA receptor 1, 2, and 2 subunits, rat glycine receptor 1 subunit, rat serotonin type-3 receptor subunit, and the T. californica (T.c.) nicotinic acetylcholine receptor 1 subunit. Aligning GABAA receptor subunit sequences with other LGIC subunits reveals a cluster of charged residues in the pre-M1 region. Cationic and anionic residues in the pre-M1 regions are in boldface. The GABAA receptor arginine residues at 1220 and 2216 are conserved in all LGIC subunits (underlined). Residues mutated to cysteine are marked with a "C" above the residue. Residues located in the GABA binding site, 2Y205 and 2R207 (Amin and Weiss, 1993 ; Wagner and Czajkowski, 2001 ), and the binding sites of other LGICs (Kao et al., 1984 ; Mishina et al., 1985 ; Dennis et al., 1988 ; Ruiz-Gomez et al., 1990 ; Galzi et al., 1991a ,b ; Vandenberg et al., 1992a ,b ; Rajendra et al., 1995 ) are marked with an asterisk. Elements of secondary structure are indicated below the sequences by the arrow ( -strand 10) and rectangle ( helix, M1 transmembrane region).
|
|
Neither GABA (1 mM) nor pentobarbital (1 mM) elicited current responses from oocytes expressing 1R220C plus 2 or 1 plus 2R216C combinations of subunits (Fig. 3A), suggesting that cysteine substitutions at these positions affected receptor assembly/surface expression or that surface mutant receptors were expressed but were unresponsive to GABA and pentobarbital. To help distinguish between these possibilities, we measured the binding of [3H]muscimol to surface receptor protein using an intact oocyte binding assay. Intact oocytes expressing 1 2R216C receptors specifically bound similar amounts of [3H]muscimol (4 ± 0.9 fmols per oocyte; n = 3) as wild-type 1 2 receptors (3 ± 0.4 fmols per oocyte; n = 3) (Fig. 3B), suggesting that the 2R216C mutation does not appear to affect receptor expression or agonist binding but uncouples ligand binding from channel gating. Oocytes expressing 1R220C 2 receptors did not bind [3H]muscimol and were not gated by GABA or pentobarbital (Fig. 3), suggesting that cysteine substitution of 1R220 was not tolerated.
MTS effects on substituted cysteines
To explore the physicochemical environment of the pre-M1 region, we examined the ability of MTS reagents that differ in size and charge to modify wild-type, 1K219C 2, 1K221C 2, 1 2K213C, and 1 2K215C receptors. The MTS reagents (Fig. 4A) used were: MTSEA-biotin, which covalently adds a neutral biotinylaminoethyl group (12 Å long); MTSET+, which adds a positively charged ethyl-trimethylammonium group (4.5 Å long); and MTSES, which adds a negatively charged ethyl-sulfonate group (4.8 Å long). Application of 2 mM MTSEA-biotin, MTSET+, and MTSES for 2 min to wild-type receptors had no effect on IGABA (EC50 concentration), indicating that any effects observed in the mutant receptors were caused by covalent modification of the introduced cysteines (Fig. 4B). MTSEA-biotin modification of 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C increased IGABA by 34 ± 2, 34 ± 9, and 34 ± 2% (n 3), respectively, and decreased IGABA by 60 ± 4% (n = 9) in 1K221C-containing receptors (Fig. 4B).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Effects of MTS reagents on wild-type and mutant GABAA receptors. A, Structures of MTS reagents represent the portions of the reagents that covalently modify an introduced cysteine. Lengths were measured after energy minimization (<0.5 kcal/Å; ChemSketch; Advanced Chemistry Development, Toronto, Ontario, Canada). B, Effects of a 2 min application of 2 mM MTSEA-biotin, MTSET+, or MTSES on wild-type (WT) and mutant receptors. The percentage change in IGABA after MTS treatment is defined as follows: [((Iafter/Iinitial) 1) x 100]. Negative values represent an inhibition of IGABA after MTS reaction, whereas positive values represent an increase in IGABA. Data represent the mean from at least four independent experiments. All of the effects observed on the mutated receptors after MTS modification, except for 1K221C 2 plus MTSET+ and 1K219C 2 plus MTSES, were statistically significant from wild type (p < 0.01).
|
|
Derivatization of 2K213C and 2K215C with MTSES increased IGABA by 47 ± 5 and 48 ± 7%, respectively, whereas MTSET+ increased IGABA by 95 ± 8 and 53 ± 4%, respectively (n 8) (Fig. 4B). In contrast, modification of 1K219C 2 and 1K221C 2 by MTSES and MTSET+ differentially affected IGABA (Fig. 4B). Tethering a negative charge (MTSES) on 1K221C 2 enhanced IGABA (98 ± 14%; n = 4), whereas treatment with the positively charged MTSET+ had no effect on IGABA (Fig. 4B). To determine whether MTSET+ reacted with 1K221C, we first applied MTSET+ and then MTSES to the same oocyte. The ability of MTSES to potentiate subsequent GABA currents was eliminated by pretreatment with MTSET+ (data not shown), indicating that MTSET+ covalently modified 1K221C, but modification had no effect in our functional assay (silent reaction). In contrast to the effects seen on 1K221C, tethering MTSET+ on 1K219C decreased IGABA (31 ± 7%; n = 3), whereas modification with MTSES had no effect (silent reaction). The different functional effects measured after MTSES and MTSET+ modification of 1K219C and 1K221C are likely caused by differences in the local electrostatic environments near these residues rather than steric effects, because MTSET+ and MTSES are similar in size (Fig. 4A) and have a common reaction mechanism.
As described above, cysteine substitution of 2R216 abolished channel gating by GABA without altering [3H]muscimol binding (Fig. 3). To determine whether restoring the positive charge at this position would restore channel gating by GABA, we measured whether GABA would elicit current responses from 1 2R216 receptors after MTSET+ exposure. Application of 2 mM MTSET+ for 2 min to 1 2R216C receptors had no effect on IGABA (data not shown), suggesting that tethering the positively charged ethyl-trimethylammonium group from MTSET+ was insufficient to restore GABAAR current responses or that the introduced cysteine was not modified.
MTS effects on maximal GABA current
An increase or decrease in IGABA after MTS application can be attributed to a change in GABA apparent affinity (EC50) and/or a change in maximal GABA response (Imax). To test whether MTS modification altered GABA Imax, we measured current responses elicited from GABA EC50 concentrations (IEC50) and saturating concentrations of GABA (10 and 300 mM; Imax) before and after MTS application (Fig. 5). MTSEA-biotin was used for the 1 mutants ( 1K219C 2, 1K221C 2) and MTSET+ for the 2 mutants ( 1 2K213C, 1 2K215C). Application of 2 mM MTSEA-biotin or MTSET+ for 2 min to wild-type receptors did not affect IEC50 or Imax (Fig. 5). MTS modification significantly increased Imax for 1K219C 2 (34 ± 3%), 1 2K213C (37 ± 7%), and 1 2K215C (43 ± 5%) receptors (n 4; p < 0.01), suggesting that tethering thiol-reactive groups at these positions caused changes in channel gating or conductance. MTSEA-biotin significantly reduced Imax by 55 ± 3% (Fig. 5) for 1K221C 2 receptors (n = 7; p < 0.01). Although the results are consistent with a decrease in channel gating at this position, we cannot rule out the possibilities that a subset of receptor channels might be blocked by the MTS compound or that modification causes an enormous increase in the unbinding of GABA, which could contribute to the decrease in Imax measured.
To estimate whether the MTS modifications were also altering GABA apparent affinity, we calculated the IEC50/Imax ratio of current responses (R) after MTS treatment for each mutant receptor. Assuming that MTS modification did not significantly alter the Hill coefficients, we would expect a ratio of 0.5 if the MTS modification had no effect on GABA EC50, a ratio >0.5 if GABA EC50 decreased, and a ratio <0.5 if GABA EC50 increased. The IEC50/Imax ratio did not alter significantly for 1K219C 2 (Rbefore, 0.44 ± 0.02; Rafter, 0.43 ± 0.02) and 1 2K215C receptors (Rbefore, 0.47 ± 0.02; Rafter, 0.50 ± 0.03) but increased significantly for 1 2K213C receptors (Rbefore, 0.47 ± 0.04; Rafter, 0.67 ± 0.05 µM) and decreased significantly at 1K221C 2 receptors (Rbefore, 0.46 ± 0.02; Rafter, 0.29 ± 0.05 µM) (n 3; p < 0.05), suggesting that covalent modification of 1K221C and 2K213C altered GABA apparent affinity. No apparent changes in macroscopic desensitization after MTS treatment were observed.
MTSET+ and MTSES reaction rates
The electrostatic potential near an introduced cysteine can be measured by comparing the second-order reaction rates of a negatively and a positively charged MTS reagent (Karlin and Akabas, 1998 ). For 1 2K213C and 1 2K215C receptors, MTSET+ rates were 80 and 43 times faster than MTSES rates, respectively (Fig. 6, Table 2). In contrast, the rate of MTSET+ modification of the simple thiol 2-mercaptoethanol in solution is only 12.5-fold faster than the rate with MTSES (Table 2). To factor out the intrinsic differences in the reactivity of the two reagents, we divided the ratio of the rates of the two reagents at an introduced cysteine by the ratio of the rates for the two reagents with mercaptoethanol (Stauffer and Karlin, 1994 ; Cheung and Akabas, 1997 ; Yang et al., 1997 ). For 2K213C, the ratio of ratios is = 80/12.5 = 6.4 and for 2K215C, = 43/12.5 = 3.4. A ratio of ratios of 1 indicates that there is no charge selectivity at that position. A ratio of ratios that is significantly larger than one indicates that there is a negative potential experienced by the thiol.
We can estimate the effective electrostatic potential at an introduced cysteine by using the following equation: = (1/zMTSET zMTSES)(RT/F)ln( ), where z is the unitary charge of the MTS reagent, R is the gas constant, T is absolute temperature, F is Faradays constant, and is the ratio of ratios calculated above (Stauffer and Karlin, 1994 ; Yang et al., 1997 ; Karlin and Akabas, 1998 ). The calculated negative electrostatic potentials at 2K213C and 2K215C in the resting state are 24 and 15 mV, respectively.
Effect of GABA on MTS reaction rates
To determine whether the pre-M1 regions undergoes structural rearrangements during channel gating, we measured the rates of MTS modification of 1K219C, 1K221C, 2K213C, and 2K215C in the absence ("closed," resting state) and presence of near-saturating GABA (open/desensitized states). The closed reaction rates were all 2000 M1·s1 (Fig. 7D, Table 3). For 1 2K213C and 1 2K215C receptors, the MTSET+ reaction rates were three and four times faster in the presence of EC8090 GABA, respectively (Fig. 7, Table 3). In contrast, MTSEA-biotin modified 1K219C approximately three times slower than in its absence, and GABA had no significant effect on the rate of modification of 1K221C (Fig. 7C, Table 3). The alterations in the rates of modifications of 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C in the presence of GABA demonstrate that GABA activation of the receptor triggers movements in or near the pre-M1 regions of both the 1 and 2 subunits.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Second-order rate constants (k2) for reaction of MTS reagents with mutant receptors in the absence (control) and presence of GABA
| |
Recently, it has been proposed that 2D146 (loop 7, CysCys loop) moves closer to 2K215C (pre-M1) in the open/desensitized state (Kash et al., 2004 ). If a negatively charged residue is moving closer to the pre-M1 region during receptor activation, then this could explain the increases in the rates of MTSET+ modification of 2K213C and 2K215C measured when GABA is present (Fig. 7, Table 3). To test this hypothesis, we examined the ability of MTSES (2 mM) to modify 2K215C in the presence of GABA. We reasoned if GABA activation of the receptor resulted in an increase in the negative electrostatic potential near 2K215C, then reaction with MTSES would be slowed or eliminated in the presence of GABA. Application of MTSES alone increased IGABA 47 ± 5% (Fig. 4). Interestingly, when GABA was coapplied with MTSES, the treatment had no effect. To determine whether MTSES reacted silently with 2K215C, we applied MTSES first in the presence of GABA and then in its absence (data not shown). When MTSES was subsequently applied in the absence of GABA, GABA currents were potentiated, indicating that MTSES does not covalently modify 2K215 when the receptor is bound with GABA. The data are consistent with the idea that activation of the receptor by GABA induces an increase in the negative electrostatic potential near 2K215C, which inhibits MTSES from reacting with the introduced cysteine.
 |
Discussion
|
|---|
Structural pathway linking agonist binding to channel gating
Structural studies suggest that acetylcholine binding to the nAChR induces a 10° clockwise rotation of the inner strands of the extracellular ligand binding domain of the subunit. It is postulated that this rigid body rotation is then translated to the transmembrane M2 channel-lining helix via the 1 2 loop (loop 2) (Miyazawa et al., 2003 ; Unwin, 2005 ). Functional studies, using rateequilibrium free energy relationships, suggest a temporal sequence of events in which agonist binding triggers a conformational wave that begins at the binding site, followed by movements of loops 2 and 7 (CysCys loop) and then the M2M3 linker, and finally movements of the transmembrane helices (Grosman et al., 2000a ,b ; Chakrapani et al., 2004 ). A recent study using a chimeric receptor comprised of AChBP fused to the transmembrane pore domain of the serotonin type-3A (5-HT3A) receptor showed that only when loops 2, 7, and 9 from AChBP were replaced with 5-HT3A receptor sequence was functional communication between the ligand binding site and channel domain restored, indicating that these loops are critical elements involved in coupling ligand binding to channel gating (Bouzat et al., 2004 ). It should be noted, however, that the above chimeric receptor contained the charged pre-M1 region of the 5-HT3A receptor, which raises the possibility that the pre-M1 region is also involved in transducing binding to gating.
Here, we provide evidence that the pre-M1 regions of the GABAA receptor 1 and 2 subunits play pivotal roles in coupling binding site movements to the channel domain. The rates of MTS modification of 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C were significantly altered in the presence of GABA (Fig. 7, Table 3), demonstrating that the pre-M1 regions undergo structural rearrangements in response to channel activation, as predicted if the pre-M1 regions propagate structural movements from the binding site to the transmembrane domain. Tethering thiol-reactive groups onto these same residues ( 1K219C, 2K213C, and 2K215C) increased maximal GABA-activated currents (Fig. 5), suggesting that structural perturbations of the pre-M1 regions alter channel gating. Finally, cysteine substitution of 2R216 abolished channel gating by GABA without altering [3H]muscimol binding (Fig. 3), indicating that this residue plays a key role in allosterically coupling GABA binding to gating. Interestingly, the 2R216C mutation also abolished channel gating by pentobarbital and suggests that this residue may be part of a common activation pathway used by both drugs.
Additional support for a role of the 2 subunit pre-M1 region in transducing binding site movements to channel gating movements comes from its location. It physically links loop C of the binding site to the membrane domain. Structural studies (Unwin et al., 2002 ; Celie et al., 2004 ) as well as molecular dynamic simulations (Henchman et al., 2005 ) reveal that agonist binding promotes movement of loop C inward to cap the binding site. We predict that this capping movement is propagated to the channel transmembrane domain by the pre-M1 region. In particular, 2R216 appears to be a key player. This residue is absolutely conserved in every member of the Cys-loop receptor superfamily, and its mutation has been shown to alter agonist-induced channel gating in other Cys-loop receptors (Vicente-Agullo et al., 2001 ; Hu et al., 2003 ; Castaldo et al., 2004 ). A model of the GABAA receptor shows 2R216 in close proximity to 2E52 (Fig. 8), which is also highly conserved, suggesting that these residues electrostatically interact and potentially form a salt bridge linking the pre-M1 region and loop 2. Using this structural pathway, we envision agonist-induced movements in the loop C region of the binding site being propagated to the pre-M1 region, loop 2, and the top of the M2 channel lining helix, which can then bring about channel opening.
Electrostatic network of interactions
The precise details of how the pre-M1 region influences these movements still remain to be worked out. Although the 4 Å structure of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor provides information about the path of the peptide backbone, residue side-chain position is difficult to determine at this resolution, especially in regions without secondary structure such as those regions that are likely mediating the interactions between the extracellular ligand binding domain (loop 2, loop 7, loop 9, pre-M1) and the transmembrane domain (extracellular end of M1, extracellular end of M2, M2M3 loop). Here, we demonstrate that the pre-M1 residues K219C, K221C, K213C, and K215C are located on the water-accessible protein surface, because charged MTS reagents were able to modify these residues (Fig. 4).
Cysteine substitutions of the conserved pre-M1 lysine residues had no effects on GABA EC50 (Fig. 2, Table 1), and thus, the positions occupied by the cysteine side chains in the mutant receptors are likely similar to the native lysine positions. This allowed us to probe the electrostatic environment of the 2 pre-M1 region using MTS reagents that differ in charge. MTSET+ modified 1 2K213C and 1 2K215C receptors significantly faster than MTSES (Fig. 6, Table 2). In the resting/closed state, we calculated a negative electrostatic potential of 24 mV near 2K213C and a potential of 15 mV near 2K215C. A single glutamate residue can contribute approximately 13.5 mV to a local potential (Stauffer and Karlin, 1994 ). Consistent with this data, in a homology model of the GABAA receptor, two negatively charged residues 2D190 (on -strand 9) and 2E147 (loop 7) are in close proximity to 2K213, whereas 2D146 (loop 7) is near 2K215 (Fig. 8). The electrostatic potential near the 1 pre-M1 region could not be measured, because MTSES had no functional effect on 1K219C and MTSET+ had no effect on 1K221C (Fig. 4). However, the model reveals 1D148 (loop 7) in close proximity to 1K219; 1D54 (loop 2), 1E143 (loop 7), and 1D144 (loop 7) near 1R220; and 1D191 (on -strand 9) near 1K221C (Fig. 9).
Previous studies have suggested that charged residues in loops 2, 7, and the M2M3 loop play important roles in LGIC activation (Grosman et al., 2000a ,b ; Absalom et al., 2003 ; Kash et al., 2003 , 2004 ; Bouzat et al., 2004 ; Mukhtasimova et al., 2005 ). It has been reported that an electrostatic interaction between 2D146 (loop 7) and 2K215 (pre-M1) is critical for receptor activation based on a double charge swap mutation ( 2D146K, K215D) restoring GABA EC50 to near wild-type values compared with single charge reversals (Kash et al., 2004 ). If gating is controlled by the pair-wise interaction between these residues, one would predict that cysteine mutation of 2K215, which removes the charge, should alter GABA EC50. This was not observed (Fig. 2, Table 1). Notably, interaction energies obtained from double mutant cycles reflect not only direct pair-wise interactions but can also reflect structural perturbations of neighboring residues as well as interactions between networks of nearby residues (Schreiber and Fersht, 1995 ), particularly if a residue is coupled to others. Our data demonstrating that structurally perturbing the pre-M1 region influences channel gating (Fig. 5) and the finding that significant coupling energies are measured between 2K215D and a variety of receptor mutations including 2D139K, 2D146K, 2E52K, 2D56K, and 2E147K [Kash et al. (2004) , their Tables 1, 2] are consistent with 2K215 and the pre-M1 region being part of a larger network of interacting residues.
Thus, we envision that a network of interactions between residues in the pre-M1 region, loop 2, loop 7, and the top of M2 exists and that coupling of neurotransmitter binding and channel gating (opening, closing, desensitization, and resensitization) is controlled by the forming and breaking of specific sets of contacts between residues in these regions. As a result of the numerous charged residues located in these regions, many of the interactions are likely to be electrostatic. Our data demonstrating that GABA activation of the receptor results in an increase in the negative electrostatic potentials near 2K215 and 2K213 (Table 3) as well as previous data in the GABAAR 1 subunit demonstrating interactions between charged residues in loop 2, loop 7, and the M2M3 loop (Kash et al., 2003 ) are consistent with this idea. The kinetics of salt bridge breaking is estimated to be 200 ns (Sheldahl and Harvey, 1999 ; Gruia et al., 2003 ), and thus, the breaking and forming of salt bridges is potentially a fast enough mechanism for transducing movements from the binding site to the channel domain.
Experiments using rateequilibrium free energy relationships (Chakrapani et al., 2004 ) suggest that the transduction of binding to gating occurs as sequential, coupled movements of "rigid body domains," with the ligand binding domain moving first ( 0.9), loop 2 and loop 7 next ( 0.8), then the M2M3 extracellular loop (![]() |