These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Differential contribution of GTPase activation and effector antagonism to the inhibitory effect of RGS proteins on Gq-mediated signaling in vivo.
    Author: Anger T, Zhang W, Mende U.
    Journal: J Biol Chem; 2004 Feb 06; 279(6):3906-15. PubMed ID: 14630933.
    Abstract:
    RGS proteins act as negative regulators of G protein signaling by serving as GTPase-activating proteins (GAP) for alpha subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins (Galpha), thereby accelerating G protein inactivation. RGS proteins can also block Galpha-mediated signal production by competing with downstream effectors for Galpha binding. Little is known about the relative contribution of GAP and effector antagonism to the inhibitory effect of RGS proteins on G protein-mediated signaling. By comparing the inhibitory effect of RGS2, RGS3, RGS5, and RGS16 on Galpha(q)-mediated phospholipase Cbeta (PLCbeta) activation under conditions where GTPase activation is possible versus nonexistent, we demonstrate that members of the R4 RGS subfamily differ significantly in their dependence on GTPase acceleration. COS-7 cells were transiently transfected with either muscarinic M3 receptors, which couple to endogenous Gq protein and mediate a stimulatory effect of carbachol on PLCbeta, or constitutively active Galphaq*, which is inert to GTP hydrolysis and activates PLCbeta independent of receptor activation. In M3-expressing cells, all of the RGS proteins significantly blunted the efficacy and potency of carbachol. In contrast, Galphaq* -induced PLCbeta activation was inhibited by RGS2 and RGS3 but not RGS5 and RGS16. The observed differential effects were not due to changes in M3, Galphaq/Galphaq*, PLCbeta, or RGS expression, as shown by receptor binding assays and Western blots. We conclude that closely related R4 RGS family members differ in their mechanism of action. RGS5 and RGS16 appear to depend on G protein inactivation, whereas GAP-independent mechanisms (such as effector antagonism) are sufficient to mediate the inhibitory effect of RGS2 and RGS3.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]