Loading…

Two isoforms of the EP3 receptor with different carboxyl-terminal domains. Identical ligand binding properties and different coupling properties with Gi proteins

Functional cDNA clones for two isoforms of the mouse prostaglandin E receptor EP3 subtype derived from alternative RNA splicing were obtained. The two isoforms are only different in the sequence of the putative cytoplasmic carboxyl-terminal tail and their hydrophobicity; one isoform, named EP3 alpha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of biological chemistry 1993-02, Vol.268 (4), p.2712-2718
Main Authors: SUGIMOTO, Y, NEGISHI, M, HAYASHI, Y, NAMBA, T, HONDA, A, WATABE, A, HIRATA, M, NARUMIYA, S, ICHIKAWA, A
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Functional cDNA clones for two isoforms of the mouse prostaglandin E receptor EP3 subtype derived from alternative RNA splicing were obtained. The two isoforms are only different in the sequence of the putative cytoplasmic carboxyl-terminal tail and their hydrophobicity; one isoform, named EP3 alpha, has a hydrophilic tail, and the other, named EP3 beta, has a hydrophobic tail. When expressed, the two receptors displayed identical ligand binding properties but different responses to guanosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTP gamma S). Without a change in the Bmax value, GTP gamma S increased Kd for prostaglandin E2 of EP3 beta and decreased that of EP3 alpha. These effects were abolished by the treatment of membranes with pertussis toxin and restored by the addition of Gi2. Although both isoforms exerted inhibition of forskolin-induced cAMP accumulation, three orders lower concentrations of agonists were required for EP3 alpha than EP3 beta for 50% inhibition of cAMP formation. A similar difference in agonist potency was observed also for agonist-induced stimulation of GTPase activity in membranes. Thus, the two receptors with different carboxyl-terminal tails show different coupling to the Gi protein, leading to the opposite responses to GTP in the ligand binding affinity and to different affinities of the agonist-occupied receptors to the G proteins.
ISSN:0021-9258
1083-351X
DOI:10.1016/S0021-9258(18)53832-1