14-3-3 protein interacts with and affects the structure of RGS domain of regulator of G protein signaling 3 (RGS3)

2010 ◽  
Vol 170 (3) ◽  
pp. 451-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lenka Rezabkova ◽  
Evzen Boura ◽  
Petr Herman ◽  
Jaroslav Vecer ◽  
Lenka Bourova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Domain

scholarly journals Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins (version 2020.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katelin E. Ahlers-Dannen ◽  
Mohammed Alqinyah ◽  
Christopher Bodle ◽  
Josephine Bou Dagher ◽  
Bandana Chakravarti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
G Protein Coupled Receptors ◽  
Signaling Cascades ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Proteins ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Heterotrimeric G Proteins ◽  
Gtp Hydrolysis ◽  
Rgs Domain ◽  
G Protein Coupled

Regulator of G protein Signaling, or RGS, proteins serve an important regulatory role in signaling mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They all share a common RGS domain that directly interacts with active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. RGS proteins stabilize the transition state for GTP hydrolysis on Gα and thus induce a conformational change in the Gα subunit that accelerates GTP hydrolysis, thereby effectively turning off signaling cascades mediated by GPCRs. This GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity is the canonical mechanism of action for RGS proteins, although many also possess additional functions and domains. RGS proteins are divided into four families, R4, R7, R12 and RZ based on sequence homology, domain structure as well as specificity towards Gα subunits. For reviews on RGS proteins and their potential as therapeutic targets, see e.g. [160, 377, 411, 415, 416, 512, 519, 312, 6].

scholarly journals Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins (version 2020.5) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katelin E. Ahlers-Dannen ◽  
Mohammed Alqinyah ◽  
Christopher Bodle ◽  
Josephine Bou Dagher ◽  
Bandana Chakravarti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
G Protein Coupled Receptors ◽  
Signaling Cascades ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Proteins ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Heterotrimeric G Proteins ◽  
Gtp Hydrolysis ◽  
Rgs Domain ◽  
G Protein Coupled

Regulator of G protein Signaling, or RGS, proteins serve an important regulatory role in signaling mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They all share a common RGS domain that directly interacts with active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. RGS proteins stabilize the transition state for GTP hydrolysis on Gα and thus induce a conformational change in the Gα subunit that accelerates GTP hydrolysis, thereby effectively turning off signaling cascades mediated by GPCRs. This GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity is the canonical mechanism of action for RGS proteins, although many also possess additional functions and domains. RGS proteins are divided into four families, R4, R7, R12 and RZ based on sequence homology, domain structure as well as specificity towards Gα subunits. For reviews on RGS proteins and their potential as therapeutic targets, see e.g. [183, 411, 446, 450, 451, 558, 566, 345, 9].

scholarly journals Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins in GtoPdb v.2021.2

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katelin E. Ahlers-Dannen ◽  
Mohammed Alqinyah ◽  
Christopher Bodle ◽  
Josephine Bou Dagher ◽  
Bandana Chakravarti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
G Protein Coupled Receptors ◽  
Signaling Cascades ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Proteins ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Heterotrimeric G Proteins ◽  
Gtp Hydrolysis ◽  
Rgs Domain ◽  
G Protein Coupled

Regulator of G protein Signaling, or RGS, proteins serve an important regulatory role in signaling mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They all share a common RGS domain that directly interacts with active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. RGS proteins stabilize the transition state for GTP hydrolysis on Gα and thus induce a conformational change in the Gα subunit that accelerates GTP hydrolysis, thereby effectively turning off signaling cascades mediated by GPCRs. This GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity is the canonical mechanism of action for RGS proteins, although many also possess additional functions and domains. RGS proteins are divided into four families, R4, R7, R12 and RZ based on sequence homology, domain structure as well as specificity towards Gα subunits. For reviews on RGS proteins and their potential as therapeutic targets, see e.g. [225, 529, 578, 583, 584, 742, 753, 444, 10].

scholarly journals Extragenic Suppressors of Loss-of-Function Mutations in the Aspergillus FlbA Regulator of G-Protein Signaling Domain Protein

Genetics ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 151 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Hyuk Yu ◽  
Stefan Rosén ◽  
Thomas H Adams
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
Growth Control ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Loss Of Function ◽  
Α Subunit ◽  
Suppressor Mutations ◽  
Rgs Domain ◽  
Signaling Domain ◽  
Domain Protein

Abstract We showed previously that two genes, flbA and fadA, have a major role in determining the balance between growth, sporulation, and mycotoxin (sterigmatocystin; ST) production by the filamentous fungus Aspergillus nidulans. fadA encodes the α subunit for a heterotrimeric G-protein, and continuous activation of FadA blocks sporulation and ST production while stimulating growth. flbA encodes an A. nidulans regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) domain protein that antagonizes FadA-mediated signaling to allow development. To better understand FlbA function and other aspects of FadA-mediated growth control, we have isolated and characterized mutations in four previously undefined genes designated as sfaA, sfaC, sfaD, and sfaE (suppressors of flbA), and a new allele of fadA (fadAR205H), all of which suppress a flbA loss-of-function mutation (flbA98). These suppressors overcome flbA losses of function in both sporulation and ST biosynthesis. fadAR205H, sfaC67, sfaD82, and sfaE83 mutations are dominant to wild type whereas sfaA1 is semidominant. sfaA1 also differs from other suppressor mutations in that it cannot suppress a flbA deletion mutation (and is therefore allele specific) whereas all the dominant suppressors can bypass complete loss of flbA. Only sfaE83 suppressed dominant activating mutations in fadA, indicating that sfaE may have a unique role in fadA-flbA interactions. Finally, none of these suppressor mutations bypassed fluG loss-of-function mutations in development-specific activation.

scholarly journals Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins (version 2019.4) in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology Database

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Alqinyah ◽  
Christopher Bodle ◽  
Josephine Bou Dagher ◽  
Bandana Chakravarti ◽  
Shreoshi P. Choudhuri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sequence Analysis ◽  
G Protein ◽  
G Proteins ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Proteins ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Heterotrimeric G Proteins ◽  
Gtp Hydrolysis ◽  
G Protein Signalling ◽  
Rgs Domain

Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins display a common RGS domain that interacts with the GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins, enhancing GTP hydrolysis by stabilising the transition state [29, 419, 418], leading to a termination of GPCR signalling. Interactions through protein:protein interactions of many RGS proteins have been identified for targets other than heteromeric G proteins. Sequence analysis of the 20 RGS proteins suggests four families of RGS: RZ, R4, R7 and R12 families. Many of these proteins have been identified to have effects other than through targetting G proteins. Included here is RGS4 for which a number of pharmacological inhibitors have been described.

The Mutation in the N-Terminal Domain of RGS4 Disrupts PA-Conferred Inhibitory Effect on GAP Activity

2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 213-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying-Shi Ou-Yang ◽  
Yaping Tu ◽  
Fuyu Yang
Keyword(s):  
G Protein ◽  
Inhibitory Effect ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Rgs Proteins ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
Site Mutation ◽  
Terminal Domain ◽  
Gtpase Activating Proteins ◽  
N Terminus ◽  
Rgs Domain

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are GTPase-activating proteins (GAP) for G protein α-subunits and are thought to be responsible for rapid deactivation of G protein mediated signaling pathway. In this present study, we demonstrate that PA is the most efficient candidate to inhibit GAP activity of RGS4. The functional significance of N-terminus of RGS4 in respose to PA-granted inhibition on GAP activity has been studied with the site mutation in the N-terminus of RGS4. These site-directed mutations in the N-terminal domain do not severely disrupt its association with liposomes of PA. However, RGS4L23E diminishes the inhibition of GAP activity by PA compared with the wild type RGS4, whereas RGSR22E abrogates the inhibitory effect by PA on GAP activity. The correspondent conformational discrepancy in the RGS domain of these mutants in the presence of PA vesicles was detected from fluorescence experiments. It is suggested that the functional pertinence between the N-terminus and RGS domain may be important to modulate PA-conferred inhibitory effect on its GAP activity.

scholarly journals The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) domain of G protein–coupled receptor kinase 5 (GRK5) regulates plasma membrane localization and function

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (13) ◽  
pp. 2105-2115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Xu ◽  
Xiaoshan Jiang ◽  
Ke Shen ◽  
Christopher C. Fischer ◽  
Philip B. Wedegaertner
Keyword(s):  
Plasma Membrane ◽  
G Protein ◽  
Calcium Release ◽  
Membrane Localization ◽  
G Protein Signaling ◽  
Protein Signaling ◽  
G Protein Coupled Receptor ◽  
Rgs Domain ◽  
And Function ◽  
G Protein Coupled

The G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) phosphorylate activated GPCRs at the plasma membrane (PM). Here GRK5/GRK4 chimeras and point mutations in GRK5 identify a short sequence within the regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) domain in GRK5 that is critical for GRK5 PM localization. This region of the RGS domain of GRK5 coincides with a region of GRK6 and GRK1 shown to form a hydrophobic dimeric interface (HDI) in crystal structures. Coimmunoprecipitation (coIP) and acceptor photobleaching fluorescence resonance energy transfer assays show that expressed GRK5 self-associates in cells, whereas GRK5-M165E/F166E (GRK5-EE), containing hydrophilic mutations in the HDI region of the RGS domain, displays greatly decreased coIP interactions. Both forcing dimerization of GRK5-EE, via fusion to leucine zipper motifs, and appending an extra C-terminal membrane-binding region to GRK5-EE (GRK5-EE-CT) recover PM localization. In addition, GRK5-EE displays a decreased ability to inhibit PAR1-induced calcium release compared with GRK5 wild type (wt). In contrast, PM-localized GRK5-EE-CaaX (appending a C-terminal prenylation and polybasic motif from K-ras) or GRK5-EE-CT shows comparable ability to GRK5 wt to inhibit PAR1-induced calcium release. The results suggest a novel model in which GRK5 dimerization is important for its plasma membrane localization and function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document