SummaryOpium is one of the world’s oldest drugs, and its derivatives morphine and codeine are among the most used clinical drugs to relieve severe pain. These prototypical opioids produce analgesia as well as many of their undesirable side effects (sedation, apnea and dependence) by binding to and activating the G-protein-coupled μ-opioid receptor (μOR) in the central nervous system. Here we describe the 2.8 Å crystal structure of the μOR in complex with an irreversible morphinan antagonist. Compared to the buried binding pocket observed in most GPCRs published to date, the morphinan ligand binds deeply within a large solvent-exposed pocket. Of particular interest, the μOR crystallizes as a two-fold symmetric dimer through a four-helix bundle motif formed by transmembrane segments 5 and 6. These high-resolution insights into opioid receptor structure will enable the application of structure-based approaches to develop better drugs for the management of pain and addiction.

Summary Activation of the μ-opioid receptor (μOR) is responsible for the efficacy of the most effective analgesics. To understand the structural basis for μOR activation, we obtained a 2.1 Å X-ray crystal structure of the μOR bound to the morphinan agonist BU72 and stabilized by a G protein-mimetic camelid-antibody fragment. The BU72-stabilized changes in the μOR binding pocket are subtle and differ from those observed for agonist-bound structures of the β2 adrenergic receptor (β2AR) and the M2 muscarinic receptor (M2R). Comparison with active β2AR reveals a common rearrangement in the packing of three conserved amino acids in the core of the μOR, and molecular dynamics simulations illustrate how the ligand-binding pocket is conformationally linked to this conserved triad. Additionally, an extensive polar network between the ligand-binding pocket and the cytoplasmic domains appears to play a similar role in signal propagation for all three GPCRs.

The μ-opioid receptor (μOR) is a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and the target of most clinically and recreationally used opioids. The induced positive effects of analgesia and euphoria are mediated by μOR signalling through the adenylyl cyclase-inhibiting heterotrimeric G protein G. Here we present the 3.5 Å resolution cryo-electron microscopy structure of the μOR bound to the agonist peptide DAMGO and nucleotide-free G. DAMGO occupies the morphinan ligand pocket, with its N terminus interacting with conserved receptor residues and its C terminus engaging regions important for opioid-ligand selectivity. Comparison of the μOR-G complex to previously determined structures of other GPCRs bound to the stimulatory G protein G reveals differences in the position of transmembrane receptor helix 6 and in the interactions between the G protein α-subunit and the receptor core. Together, these results shed light on the structural features that contribute to the G protein-coupling specificity of the µOR.

No abstract

We have designed a microfluidic device in which we can manipulate, lyse, label, separate, and quantify the protein contents of a single cell using single-molecule fluorescence counting. Generic labeling of proteins is achieved through fluorescent-antibody binding. The use of cylindrical optics enables high-efficiency (approximately 60%) counting of molecules in micrometer-sized channels. We used this microfluidic device to quantify beta2 adrenergic receptors expressed in insect cells (SF9). We also analyzed phycobiliprotein contents in individual cyanobacterial cells (Synechococcus sp. PCC 7942) and observed marked differences in the levels of specific complexes in cell populations that were grown under nitrogen-depleted conditions.

μ-Opioid receptors (μOR) are G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) that are activated by a structurally diverse spectrum of natural and synthetic agonists including endogenous endorphin peptides, morphine and methadone. The recent structures of the μOR in inactive1 and agonist-induced active states (companion article) provide snapshots of the receptor at the beginning and end of a signaling event, but little is known about the dynamic sequence of events that span these two states. Here we report the use of solution-state NMR to examine the process of μOR activation. We obtained spectra of the μOR in the absence of ligand, and in the presence of the high-affinity agonist BU72 alone, or with BU72 and a G protein mimetic nanobody. Our results show that conformational changes in transmembrane segments (TM) 5 and 6, which are required for the full engagement of a G protein, are almost completely dependent on the presence of both the agonist and the G protein mimetic nanobody revealing a weak allosteric coupling between the agonist binding pocket and the G protein coupling interface (TM5 and TM6) similar to what has been observed for the β2-adrenergic receptor2. Unexpectedly, in the presence of agonist alone, we observe larger spectral changes involving intracellular loop 1 (ICL1) and helix 8 (H8), when compared to changes in TM5 and TM6. These results suggest that one or both of these domains may play a role in the initial interaction with the G protein, and that TM5 and TM6 are only engaged later in the process of complex formation. The initial interactions between the G protein and ICL1 and/or H8 may play a role in G protein coupling specificity as has been suggested for other family A GPCRs.

Adiponectin receptors (ADIPORs) are integral membrane proteins that control glucose and lipid metabolism by mediating, at least in part, a cellular ceramidase activity that catalyses the hydrolysis of ceramide to produce sphingosine and a free fatty acid (FFA). The crystal structures of the two receptor subtypes, ADIPOR1 and ADIPOR2, show a similar overall seven-transmembrane-domain architecture with large unoccupied cavities and a zinc binding site within the seven transmembrane domain. However, the molecular mechanisms by which ADIPORs function are not known. Here we describe the crystal structure of ADIPOR2 bound to a FFA molecule and show that ADIPOR2 possesses intrinsic basal ceramidase activity that is enhanced by adiponectin. We also identify a ceramide binding pose and propose a possible mechanism for the hydrolytic activity of ADIPOR2 using computational approaches. In molecular dynamics simulations, the side chains of residues coordinating the zinc rearrange quickly to promote the nucleophilic attack of a zinc-bound hydroxide ion onto the ceramide amide carbonyl. Furthermore, we present a revised ADIPOR1 crystal structure exhibiting a seven-transmembrane-domain architecture that is clearly distinct from that of ADIPOR2. In this structure, no FFA is observed and the ceramide binding pocket and putative zinc catalytic site are exposed to the inner membrane leaflet. ADIPOR1 also possesses intrinsic ceramidase activity, so we suspect that the two distinct structures may represent key steps in the enzymatic activity of ADIPORs. The ceramidase activity is low, however, and further studies will be required to characterize fully the enzymatic parameters and substrate specificity of ADIPORs. These insights into ADIPOR function will enable the structure-based design of potent modulators of these clinically relevant enzymes.

β1- and β2-adrenergic receptors (βARs) are highly homologous, yet they play clearly distinct roles in cardiac physiology and pathology. Myocyte contraction, for instance, is readily stimulated by β1AR but not β2AR signaling, and chronic stimulation of the two receptors has opposing effects on myocyte apoptosis and cell survival. Differences in the assembly of macromolecular signaling complexes may explain the distinct biological outcomes. Here, we demonstrate that β1AR forms a signaling complex with a cAMP-specific phosphodiesterase (PDE) in a manner inherently different from a β2AR/β-arrestin/PDE complex reported previously. The β1AR binds a PDE variant, PDE4D8, in a direct manner, and occupancy of the receptor by an agonist causes dissociation of this complex. Conversely, agonist binding to the β2AR is a prerequisite for the recruitment of a complex consisting of β-arrestin and the PDE4D variant, PDE4D5, to the receptor. We propose that the distinct modes of interaction with PDEs result in divergent cAMP signals in the vicinity of the two receptors, thus, providing an additional layer of complexity to enforce the specificity of β1- and β2-adrenoceptor signaling.