Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.
Regulators of G Protein Signaling and Transient Activation of Signaling
EXPERIMENTAL AND COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS REVEALS NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE FEEDBACK CONTROLS ON G PROTEIN ACTIVITY*
Nan Hao,
Necmettin Yildirim,
Yuqi Wang,
Timothy C. Elston¶, , and
Henrik G. Dohlman||
Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-0812 and the Department of Mathematics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3250
Abstract:
Cellular responses to hormones and neurotransmitters are necessarilytransient. The mating pheromone signal in yeast is typical.Signal initiation requires cell surface receptors, a G proteinheterotrimer, and down-stream effectors. Signal inactivationrequires Sst2, a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteinthat accelerates GTPase activity. We conducted a quantitativeanalysis of RGS and G protein expression and devised computationalmodels that describe their activity in vivo. These results indicatedthat pheromone-dependent transcriptional induction of the RGSprotein constitutes a negative feedback loop that leads to desensitization.Modeling also suggested the presence of a positive feedbackloop leading to resensitization of the pathway. In confirmationof the model, we found that the RGS protein is ubiquitinatedand degraded in response to pheromone stimulation. We identifiedand quantitated these positive and negative feedback loops,which account for the transient response to external signalsobserved in vivo.
Received for publication August 1, 2003.
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health GrantsGM55316 and GM59167 (to H. G. D.), by American Heart AssociationFellowship 0225390U (to Y. W.), and by Defense Advanced ResearchProjects Agency Grant F30602-01-2-0579 (to T. C. E. and N. Y.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in partby the payment of page charges. This article must thereforebe hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C.Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶ To whom correspondence may be addressed. E-mail: telston{at}amath.unc.edu. || To whom correspondence may be addressed. E-mail: hdohlman{at}med.unc.edu.
The editors suggest the following Related Resources on Science sites:
The Salmonella Typhimurium effector SteC inhibits Cdc42-mediated signaling through binding to the exchange factor Cdc24 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
P. Fernandez-Pinar, A. Aleman, J. Sondek, H. G. Dohlman, M. Molina, and H. Martin (2012)
Mol. Biol. Cell
23, 4430-4443
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Functional and Physical Interactions among Saccharomyces cerevisiae {alpha}-Factor Receptors.
A. U. Gehret, S. M. Connelly, and M. E. Dumont (2012)
Eukaryot. Cell
11, 1276-1288
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Combined computational and experimental analysis reveals mitogen-activated protein kinase-mediated feedback phosphorylation as a mechanism for signaling specificity.
N. Hao, N. Yildirim, M. J. Nagiec, S. C. Parnell, B. Errede, H. G. Dohlman, and T. C. Elston (2012)
Mol. Biol. Cell
23, 3899-3910
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Scaffold number in yeast signaling system sets tradeoff between system output and dynamic range.
T. M. Thomson, K. R. Benjamin, A. Bush, T. Love, D. Pincus, O. Resnekov, R. C. Yu, A. Gordon, A. Colman-Lerner, D. Endy, et al. (2011)
PNAS
108, 20265-20270
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Pheromone- and RSP5-dependent Ubiquitination of the G Protein {beta} Subunit Ste4 in Yeast.
M. Zhu, M. P. Torres, J. B. Kelley, H. G. Dohlman, and Y. Wang (2011)
J. Biol. Chem.
286, 27147-27155
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Cell Cycle-dependent Phosphorylation and Ubiquitination of a G Protein {alpha} Subunit.
M. P. Torres, S. T. Clement, S. D. Cappell, and H. G. Dohlman (2011)
J. Biol. Chem.
286, 20208-20216
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Kinetics of M1 muscarinic receptor and G protein signaling to phospholipase C in living cells.
B. H. Falkenburger, J. B. Jensen, and B. Hille (2010)
J. Gen. Physiol.
135, 81-97
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
G Protein Mono-ubiquitination by the Rsp5 Ubiquitin Ligase.
M. P. Torres, M. J. Lee, F. Ding, C. Purbeck, B. Kuhlman, N. V. Dokholyan, and H. G. Dohlman (2009)
J. Biol. Chem.
284, 8940-8950
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Modeling of G-protein-coupled Receptor Signaling Pathways.
J. J. Linderman (2009)
J. Biol. Chem.
284, 5427-5431
|Full Text »|PDF »
Regulation of G Protein and Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Signaling by Ubiquitination: Insights From Model Organisms.
The Ste5 Scaffold Allosterically Modulates Signaling Output of the Yeast Mating Pathway.
R. P. Bhattacharyya, A. Remenyi, M. C. Good, C. J. Bashor, A. M. Falick, and W. A. Lim (2006)
Science
311, 822-826
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Genome-Scale Analysis Reveals Sst2 as the Principal Regulator of Mating Pheromone Signaling in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
S. A. Chasse, P. Flanary, S. C. Parnell, N. Hao, J. Y. Cha, D. P. Siderovski, and H. G. Dohlman (2006)
Eukaryot. Cell
5, 330-346
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Pheromone-regulated Sumoylation of Transcription Factors That Mediate the Invasive to Mating Developmental Switch in Yeast.
Functional Selectivity of G Protein Signaling by Agonist Peptides and Thrombin for the Protease-activated Receptor-1.
J. N. McLaughlin, L. Shen, M. Holinstat, J. D. Brooks, E. DiBenedetto, and H. E. Hamm (2005)
J. Biol. Chem.
280, 25048-25059
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Except in Every Detail: Comparing and Contrasting G-Protein Signaling in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe.
C. S. Hoffman (2005)
Eukaryot. Cell
4, 495-503
|Full Text »|PDF »
Differential Regulation of G Protein {alpha} Subunit Trafficking by Mono- and Polyubiquitination.
Y. Wang, L. A. Marotti Jr., M. J. Lee, and H. G. Dohlman (2005)
J. Biol. Chem.
280, 284-291
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
Computational modeling reveals how interplay between components of a GTPase-cycle module regulates signal transduction.
S. J. Bornheimer, M. R. Maurya, M. G. Farquhar, and S. Subramaniam (2004)
PNAS
101, 15899-15904
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »
A Functional Polymorphism in RGS6 Modulates the Risk of Bladder Cancer.
D. M. Berman, Y. Wang, Z. Liu, Q. Dong, L.-A. Burke, L. A. Liotta, R. Fisher, and X. Wu (2004)
Cancer Res.
64, 6820-6826
|Abstract »|Full Text »|PDF »