4.5 Article

Functional differences between human formyl peptide receptor isoforms 26, 98, and G6

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s00210-003-0714-7

关键词

constitutive activity; G(i)-proteins; GTP-gamma S binding; receptor dimers; Sf9 cells

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P20 RR 15563] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The formyl peptide receptor (FPR) is expressed in neutrophils, couples to G(i)-proteins and activates phospholipase C, chemotaxis and cytotoxic cell functions. FPR isoforms 26, 98, and G6 differ from each other in amino acids 101, 192 and 346 (FPR-26: V101, N192, E346; FPR-98: L101, N192, A346; FPR-G6: V101, K192, A346), but the functional significance of those structural differences is unknown. In order to address this question, we analyzed FPR-26, FPR-98 and FPR-G6 by co-expressing recombinant FLAG epitope-tagged FPRs with the G-protein G(i)alpha(2)beta(1)gamma(2) in Sf9 insect cells and measured high-affinity agonist binding and guanosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTPgammaS) binding. The B-max values of high-affinity agonist binding with FPR-98 and FPR-G6 were much lower than with FPR-26. FPR-98 and FPR-G6 activated considerably fewer G(i)-proteins, and were much less constitutively active, than FPR-26. Whereas FPR-26 migrated as a monomer in SDS polyacrylamide electrophoresis, FPR-98 and FPR-G6 migrated as dimers and tetramers. In terms of immunoreactivity, FRP-98 and FPR-G6 were expressed at higher levels than FPR-26. Single amino acid exchanges at positions 101 (V-->L), 192 (N-->K) and 346 (E-->A) in FPR-26 revealed that E346 accounts for FPR-26 migrating as a monomer and the high constitutive activity of FPR-26. The V101L, N192K and E346A exchanges all reduced high-affmity agonist binding and the number of G(i)-proteins activated by FPR-26. We conclude that (i) FPR isoforms 98 and G6 exhibit a partial G(i)-protein coupling defect relative to FPR-26 and that (ii) E346 critically determines constitutive activity, G(i)-protein coupling and physical state of FPR-26.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据