Experimental and in silico Alphafold2 derived structures of the SNX-RGS proteins suggest a new class of lipid transfer protein

Recent advances in protein structure prediction using machine learning such as AlphaFold2 and RosettaFold presage a revolution in structural biology. Genome-wide predictions of protein structures are providing unprecedented insights into their architecture and intradomain interactions, and applications have already progressed towards assessing protein complex formation. Here we present detailed analyses of the sorting nexin proteins that contain regulator of G-protein signalling domains (SNX-RGS proteins), providing a key example of the ability of AlphaFold2 to reveal novel structures with previously unsuspected biological functions. These large proteins are conserved in most eukaryotes and are known to associate with lipid droplets (LDs) and sites of LD-membrane contacts, with key roles in regulating lipid metabolism. Previous studies indicate they possess five domains, including an N-terminal transmembrane domain that anchors them to the endoplasmic reticulum, an RGS domain, a lipid interacting phox homology (PX) domain and two additional domains named the PXA and PXC domains of unknown structure and function. Here we report the crystal structure of the RGS domain of sorting nexin 25 (SNX25) and show that the AlphaFold2 prediction closely matches the experimental structure. Analysing the full-length SNX-RGS proteins across multiple homologues and species we find that the distant PXA and PXC domains in fact fold into a single unique structure that notably features a large and conserved hydrophobic pocket. The nature of this pocket strongly suggests a role in lipid or fatty acid binding, and we propose that these molecules represent a new class of conserved lipid transfer proteins.

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

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].

SNX-PXA-RGS-PXC Subfamily of SNXs in the Regulation of Receptor-Mediated Signaling and Membrane Trafficking

The SNX-PXA-RGS-PXC subfamily of sorting nexins (SNXs) belongs to the superfamily of SNX proteins. SNXs are characterized by the presence of a common phox-homology (PX) domain, along with other functional domains that play versatile roles in cellular signaling and membrane trafficking. In addition to the PX domain, the SNX-PXA-RGS-PXC subfamily, except for SNX19, contains a unique RGS (regulators of G protein signaling) domain that serves as GTPase activating proteins (GAPs), which accelerates GTP hydrolysis on the G protein α subunit, resulting in termination of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling. Moreover, the PX domain selectively interacts with phosphatidylinositol-3-phosphate and other phosphoinositides found in endosomal membranes, while also associating with various intracellular proteins. Although SNX19 lacks an RGS domain, all members of the SNX-PXA-RGS-PXC subfamily serve as dual regulators of receptor cargo signaling and endosomal trafficking. This review discusses the known and proposed functions of the SNX-PXA-RGS-PXC subfamily and how it participates in receptor signaling (both GPCR and non-GPCR) and endosomal-based membrane trafficking. Furthermore, we discuss the difference of this subfamily of SNXs from other subfamilies, such as SNX-BAR nexins (Bin-Amphiphysin-Rvs) that are associated with retromer or other retrieval complexes for the regulation of receptor signaling and membrane trafficking. Emerging evidence has shown that the dysregulation and malfunction of this subfamily of sorting nexins lead to various pathophysiological processes and disorders, including hypertension.

The RGS-RhoGEFs control the amplitude of YAP1 activation by serum

Actin-dependent mechanisms drive the nuclear translocation of Yap1 to enable its co-activation of transcription factors that induce pro-growth and survival programs. While Rho GTPases are necessary for the nuclear import of YAP1, the relevant Guanine Exchange Factors (GEFs) and GTPase Activating Proteins (GAPs) that connect this process to upstream signaling are not well defined. To this end, we measured the impact of expressing sixty-seven RhoGEFs and RhoGAPs on the YAP1 dependent activity of a TEAD element transcriptional reporter. Robust effects by all three members of the regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) domain containing RhoGEFs (ArhGEF1, ArhGEF11 and ArhGEF12) prompted studies relating their known roles in serum signaling onto the regulation of Yap1. Under all conditions examined, ArhGEF12 preferentially mediated the activation of YAP1/TEAD by serum versus ArhGEF1 or ArhGEF11. Conversely, ArhGEF1 in multiple contexts inhibited both basal and serum elevated YAP1 activity through its GAP activity for Gα13. The sensitivity of such inhibition to cellular density and to low states of serum signaling supports that ArhGEF1 is a context dependent regulator of YAP1. Taken together, the relative activities of the RGS-RhoGEFs were found to dictate the degree to which serum signaling promotes YAP1 activity.

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

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].

Osmolytes and Macromolecular Crowders Diversely Affect the Aggregation of the Cancerrelated L106R Mutant of the Axin RGS Domain

<p>Protein aggregation is involved in a variety of diseases, including neurodegenerative diseases and cancer. The cellular environment is crowded by a plethora of cosolutes comprising small molecules and biomacromolecules at high concentrations, which may influence the aggregation of proteins <i>in vivo</i>. To account for the effect of cosolutes on cancer-related protein aggregation, we studied their effect on the aggregation of the cancer-related L106R mutant of the Axin protein. Axin is a key player in the Wnt signaling pathway, and the L106R mutation in its RGS domain results in a native molten globule that tends to form native-like aggregates. This results in uncontrolled activation of the Wnt signaling pathway, leading to cancer. We monitored the aggregation process of Axin RGS L106R<i>in vitro </i>in the presence of a wide ensemble of cosolutes including polyols, amino acids, betaine and polyethylene glycol (PEG) crowders. Except <i>myo</i>-inositol, all polyols decreased RGS L106R aggregation, with carbohydrates exerting the strongest inhibition. Conversely, betaine and PEGs enhanced aggregation. These results are consistent with the reported effects of osmolytes and crowders on the stability of molten globular proteins and with both amorphous and amyloid aggregation mechanisms. We suggest a model of Axin L106R aggregation <i>in vivo, </i>whereby molecularly small osmolytes keep the protein as a free solublemolecule but the increased crowding of the bound state by macromolecules induces its aggregation at the nano-scale. Our study sheds light on the potential contribution of cosolutes to the onset of cancer as a protein misfolding disease, and on the relevance of aggregation in the molecular aetiology of cancer.</p>

Osmolytes and Macromolecular Crowders Diversely Affect the Aggregation of the Cancerrelated L106R Mutant of the Axin RGS Domain

<p>Protein aggregation is involved in a variety of diseases, including neurodegenerative diseases and cancer. The cellular environment is crowded by a plethora of cosolutes comprising small molecules and biomacromolecules at high concentrations, which may influence the aggregation of proteins <i>in vivo</i>. To account for the effect of cosolutes on cancer-related protein aggregation, we studied their effect on the aggregation of the cancer-related L106R mutant of the Axin protein. Axin is a key player in the Wnt signaling pathway, and the L106R mutation in its RGS domain results in a native molten globule that tends to form native-like aggregates. This results in uncontrolled activation of the Wnt signaling pathway, leading to cancer. We monitored the aggregation process of Axin RGS L106R<i>in vitro </i>in the presence of a wide ensemble of cosolutes including polyols, amino acids, betaine and polyethylene glycol (PEG) crowders. Except <i>myo</i>-inositol, all polyols decreased RGS L106R aggregation, with carbohydrates exerting the strongest inhibition. Conversely, betaine and PEGs enhanced aggregation. These results are consistent with the reported effects of osmolytes and crowders on the stability of molten globular proteins and with both amorphous and amyloid aggregation mechanisms. We suggest a model of Axin L106R aggregation <i>in vivo, </i>whereby molecularly small osmolytes keep the protein as a free solublemolecule but the increased crowding of the bound state by macromolecules induces its aggregation at the nano-scale. Our study sheds light on the potential contribution of cosolutes to the onset of cancer as a protein misfolding disease, and on the relevance of aggregation in the molecular aetiology of cancer.</p>

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

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].

Wnt Regulation: Exploring Axin-Disheveled interactions and defining mechanisms by which the SCF E3 ubiquitin ligase is recruited to the destruction complex

Wnt signaling plays key roles in embryonic development and adult stem cell homeostasis, and is altered in human cancer. Signaling is turned on and off by regulating stability of the effector β-catenin. The multiprotein destruction complex binds and phosphorylates β-catenin, and transfers it to the SCF-TrCP E3-ubiquitin ligase, for ubiquitination and destruction. Wnt signals act though Dishevelled to turn down the destruction complex, stabilizing β-catenin. Recent work clarified underlying mechanisms, but important questions remain. We explore β-catenin transfer from the destruction complex to the E3 ligase, and test models suggesting Dishevelled and APC2 compete for association with Axin. We find that Slimb/TrCP is a dynamic component of the destruction complex biomolecular condensate, while other E3 proteins are not. Recruitment requires Axin and not APC, and Axin’s RGS domain plays an important role. We find that elevating Dishevelled levels in Drosophila embryos has paradoxical effects, promoting the ability of limiting levels of Axin to turn off Wnt signaling. When we elevate Dishevelled levels, it forms its own cytoplasmic puncta, but these do not recruit Axin. SIM imaging in mammalian cells suggests that this may result by promoting Dishevelled: Dishevelled interactions at the expense of Dishevelled:Axin interactions when Dishevelled levels are high.