2015
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.m114.612606
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ligand Binding Pocket Formed by Evolutionarily Conserved Residues in the Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Core Domain

Abstract: Background:Little is known about the interaction between GLP-1 and the heptahelical core domain of GLP1R. Results: GLP-1 Asp 9 and Gly 4 interact with the evolutionarily conserved residues in extracellular loop 3. Conclusion: Ligand binding pocket formed by evolutionarily conserved residues in the GLP1R core domain. Significance: This study highlights the mechanism underlying high affinity interaction between GLP-1 and the binding pocket of the receptor.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This difference between GLP-1R and GCGR may explain why the R190 2.60b K mutant diminishes GLP-1 binding to GLP-1R, while the inverse K187 2.60b R does not affect glucagon binding to GCGR (Table 1). In addition to this tight ionic interaction network deep in the transmembrane helical bundle, our MD simulations support an earlier proposed (29) ionic interaction between Asp 15 and R380 7.35b (Fig. 4) and predict a previously untested electrostatic interaction between Glu 21 and R299…”
Section: Tm-binding Site Whereas In Glucagon-bound Gcgr the Ionic Isupporting
confidence: 68%
“…This difference between GLP-1R and GCGR may explain why the R190 2.60b K mutant diminishes GLP-1 binding to GLP-1R, while the inverse K187 2.60b R does not affect glucagon binding to GCGR (Table 1). In addition to this tight ionic interaction network deep in the transmembrane helical bundle, our MD simulations support an earlier proposed (29) ionic interaction between Asp 15 and R380 7.35b (Fig. 4) and predict a previously untested electrostatic interaction between Glu 21 and R299…”
Section: Tm-binding Site Whereas In Glucagon-bound Gcgr the Ionic Isupporting
confidence: 68%
“…With the aim of modelling the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP1) 70 bound to the GLP1 receptor (GLP1R), homology models were built by utilizing the crystal structures of the CRF 1 R, the glucagon receptor (GCGR), and the ligand-bound ECD of GLP1R and the gastric inhibitory polypeptide receptor (GIPR) as templates 280 . The Authors found that the residues Asp 9 and Gly 4 75 in GLP-1 interacted with the conserved residues in EL 3 , while the binding site of GLP1R is constituted by conserved amino acids in the core domain.…”
Section: The Latest Milestone: Modelling Gpcr Classes B and Cmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These templates were linked by a global alignment, which was used by Modeler to generate a full GLP-1R model with GLP-1(7-36)NH 2 bound. Modeler used 4 p-benzoylphenylalanine (Bpa) photoaffinity crosslinking-derived distance constraints between GLP-1 and GLP-1R (Chen et al, 2009(Chen et al, , 2010Miller et al, 2011) and two sets of constraints derived from reciprocal mutagenesis experiments that resulted in gain of function Vertongen et al, 2001;Moon et al, 2015), as shown in Table 1; the effect of these constraints was to provide additional information on the peptide-receptor interaction in the region between the TM and ECD templates. These reciprocal mutagenesis results were essentially the only mutagenesis results used in the generation of the model.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%