Dataset Information

What Makes GPCRs from Different Families Bind to the Same Ligand?

ABSTRACT: G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest class of cell-surface receptor proteins with important functions in signal transduction and often serve as therapeutic drug targets. With the rapidly growing public data on three dimensional (3D) structures of GPCRs and GPCR-ligand interactions, computational prediction of GPCR ligand binding becomes a convincing option to high throughput screening and other experimental approaches during the beginning phases of ligand discovery. In this work, we set out to computationally uncover and understand the binding of a single ligand to GPCRs from several different families. Three-dimensional structural comparisons of the GPCRs that bind to the same ligand revealed local 3D structural similarities and often these regions overlap with locations of binding pockets. These pockets were found to be similar (based on backbone geometry and side-chain orientation using APoc), and they correlate positively with electrostatic properties of the pockets. Moreover, the more similar the pockets, the more likely a ligand binding to the pockets will interact with similar residues, have similar conformations, and produce similar binding affinities across the pockets. These findings can be exploited to improve protein function inference, drug repurposing and drug toxicity prediction, and accelerate the development of new drugs.

SUBMITTER: Dankwah KO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9313020 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The emergence of resistance to existing classes of antiretroviral drugs necessitates finding new HIV-1 targets for drug discovery. The viral capsid (CA) protein represents one such potential new target. CA is sufficient to form mature HIV-1 capsids in vitro, and extensive structure-function and mutational analyses of CA have shown that the proper assembly, morphology, and stability of the mature capsid core are essential for the infectivity of HIV-1 virions. Here we describe the development of an in vitro capsid assembly assay based on the association of CA-NC subunits on immobilized oligonucleotides. This assay was used to screen a compound library, yielding several different families of compounds that inhibited capsid assembly. Optimization of two chemical series, termed the benzodiazepines (BD) and the benzimidazoles (BM), resulted in compounds with potent antiviral activity against wild-type and drug-resistant HIV-1. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopic and X-ray crystallographic analyses showed that both series of inhibitors bound to the N-terminal domain of CA. These inhibitors induce the formation of a pocket that overlaps with the binding site for the previously reported CAP inhibitors but is expanded significantly by these new, more potent CA inhibitors. Virus release and electron microscopic (EM) studies showed that the BD compounds prevented virion release, whereas the BM compounds inhibited the formation of the mature capsid. Passage of virus in the presence of the inhibitors selected for resistance mutations that mapped to highly conserved residues surrounding the inhibitor binding pocket, but also to the C-terminal domain of CA. The resistance mutations selected by the two series differed, consistent with differences in their interactions within the pocket, and most also impaired virus replicative capacity. Resistance mutations had two modes of action, either directly impacting inhibitor binding affinity or apparently increasing the overall stability of the viral capsid without affecting inhibitor binding. These studies demonstrate that CA is a viable antiviral target and demonstrate that inhibitors that bind within the same site on CA can have distinct binding modes and mechanisms of action.

Project description:We explore the relationship between first language attrition and language dominance, defined here as the relative availability of each of a bilingual's languages with respect to language processing. We assume that both processes might represent two stages of one and the same phenomenon (Schmid and Köpke, 2017; Köpke, 2018). While many researchers agree that language dominance changes repeatedly over the lifespan (e.g., Silva-Corvalan and Treffers-Daller, 2015), little is known about the precise time scales involved in dominance shifts and attrition. We investigate these time scales in a longitudinal case study of pronominal subject production by a near-native L2-German (semi-null subject and topic-drop but non-pro-drop) and L1-Bulgarian (pro-drop) bilingual speaker with 17 years of residence in Germany. This speaker's spontaneous speech showed a significantly higher rate of overt pronominal subjects in her L1 than the controls' rates when tested in Germany. After 3 weeks of L1-reexposure in Bulgaria, however, attrition effects disappeared and the overt subject rate fell within the monolinguals' range (Genevska-Hanke, 2017). The findings of this first investigation are now compared to those of a second investigation 5 years later, involving data collection in both countries with the result that after 17 years of immigration, no further attrition was attested and the production of overt subjects remained monolingual-like for the data collections in both language environments. The discussion focuses on the factors that are likely to explain these results. First, these show that attrition and language dominance are highly dependent on immediate language use context and change rapidly when the language environment is modified. Additionally, the data obtained after L1-reexposure illustrate that time scales involved in dominance shift or attrition are much shorter than previously thought. Second, the role of age of acquisition in attrition has repeatedly been acknowledged. The present study demonstrates that attrition of a highly entrenched L1 is a phenomenon affecting language processing only temporarily and that it is likely to regress quickly after reexposure or return to balanced L1-use. The discussion suggests that dominance shift and attrition probably involve similar mechanisms and are influenced by the same external factors, showing that both may be different steps of the same process.

Dataset Information

What Makes GPCRs from Different Families Bind to the Same Ligand?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets