The Predicted 3D Structures of the Human M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor with Agonist or Antagonist Bound

The muscarinic acetylcholine G‐protein‐coupled receptors are implicated in diseases ranging from cognitive dysfunctions to smooth‐muscle disorders. To provide a structural basis for drug design, we used the MembStruk computational method to predict the 3D structure of the human M1 muscarinic receptor. We validated this structure by using the HierDock method to predict the binding sites for three agonists and four antagonists. The intermolecular ligand–receptor contacts at the predicted binding sites agree well with deductions from available mutagenesis experiments, and the calculated relative binding energies correlate with measured binding affinities. The predicted binding site of all four antagonists is located between transmembrane (TM) helices 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, whereas the three agonists prefer a site involving residues from TM3, TM6, and TM7. We find that Trp 157(4) contributes directly to antagonist binding, whereas Pro 159(4) provides an indirect conformational switch to position Trp 157(4) in the binding site (the number in parentheses indicates the TM helix). This explains the large decrease in ligand binding affinity and signaling efficacy by mutations of Trp 157(4) and Pro 159(4) not previously explained by homology models. We also found that Asp 105(3) and aromatic residues Tyr 381(6), Tyr 404(7), and Tyr 408(7) are critical for binding the quaternary ammonium head group of the ligand through cation–π interactions. For ligands with a charged tertiary amine head group, we suggest that proton transfer from the ligand to Asp 105(3) occurs upon binding. Furthermore, we found that an extensive aromatic network involving Tyr 106(3), Trp 157(4), Phe 197(5), Trp 378(6), and Tyr 381(6) is important in stabilizing antagonist binding. For antagonists with two terminal phenyl rings, this aromatic network extends to Trp 164(4), Tyr 179(extracellular loop 2), and Phe 390(6) located at the extracellular end of the TMs. We find that Asn 382(6) forms hydrogen bonds with selected antagonists. Tyr381(6) and Ser 109(3) form hydrogen bonds with the ester moiety of acetylcholine, which binds in the gauche conformation.

[1]  Olgun Guvench,et al.  Tryptophan side chain electrostatic interactions determine edge-to-face vs parallel-displaced tryptophan side chain geometries in the designed beta-hairpin "trpzip2". , 2005, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[2]  Nagarajan Vaidehi,et al.  Test of the Binding Threshold Hypothesis for olfactory receptors: Explanation of the differential binding of ketones to the mouse and human orthologs of olfactory receptor 912‐93 , 2005, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[3]  J. Kelly,et al.  Toward assessing the position-dependent contributions of backbone hydrogen bonding to beta-sheet folding thermodynamics employing amide-to-ester perturbations. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[4]  Brendan J. Howlin,et al.  Antagonist binding in the rat muscarinic receptor: A study by docking and X-ray crystallography , 2004, Comput. Biol. Chem..

[5]  Nagarajan Vaidehi,et al.  Predicted 3-D structures for mouse I7 and rat I7 olfactory receptors and comparison of predicted odor recognition profiles with experiment. , 2004, Chemical senses.

[6]  Nagarajan Vaidehi,et al.  First principles predictions of the structure and function of g-protein-coupled receptors: validation for bovine rhodopsin. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[7]  T. Sixma,et al.  Nicotine and Carbamylcholine Binding to Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors as Studied in AChBP Crystal Structures , 2004, Neuron.

[8]  Peter L. Freddolino,et al.  The predicted 3D structure of the human D2 dopamine receptor and the binding site and binding affinities for agonists and antagonists. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  Peter L. Freddolino,et al.  Predicted 3D structure for the human beta 2 adrenergic receptor and its binding site for agonists and antagonists. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Christian C. Felder,et al.  Use of M1–M5 Muscarinic Receptor Knockout Mice as Novel Tools to Delineate the Physiological Roles of the Muscarinic Cholinergic System , 2003, Neurochemical Research.

[11]  William A. Goddard,et al.  Fidelity of Phenylalanyl-tRNA Synthetase in Binding the Natural Amino Acids , 2003 .

[12]  Rodrigo Lopez,et al.  Multiple sequence alignment with the Clustal series of programs , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Wely B. Floriano,et al.  Interaction of e. coli outer‐membrane protein A with sugars on the receptors of the brain microvascular endothelial cells , 2002, Proteins.

[14]  Didier Rognan,et al.  Protein‐based virtual screening of chemical databases. II. Are homology models of g‐protein coupled receptors suitable targets? , 2002, Proteins.

[15]  J. Saldanha,et al.  Structure and activation of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. , 2001, Biochemical Society transactions.

[16]  E C Hulme,et al.  Scanning mutagenesis studies of the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. , 2003, Receptors & channels.

[17]  Nagarajan Vaidehi,et al.  Virtual screening for binding of phenylalanine analogues to phenylalanyl-tRNA synthetase. , 2002, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[18]  Shigeyuki Yokoyama,et al.  Conformation of ligands bound to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. , 2002, Molecular pharmacology.

[19]  Peter L. Freddolino,et al.  Prediction of structure and function of G protein-coupled receptors , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  W. Goddard,et al.  Structure-based design of mutant Methanococcus jannaschii tyrosyl-tRNA synthetase for incorporation of O-methyl-l-tyrosine , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  W. Messer Cholinergic agonists and the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. , 2002, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[22]  W. Goddard,et al.  Mechanism for antibody catalysis of the oxidation of water by singlet dioxygen , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  K. Palczewski,et al.  Crystal Structure of Rhodopsin: A G‐Protein‐Coupled Receptor , 2002, Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology.

[24]  J W Saldanha,et al.  Transmembrane Domains 4 and 7 of the M1Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Are Critical for Ligand Binding and the Receptor Activation Switch* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[25]  R. Eglen,et al.  Therapeutic opportunities from muscarinic receptor research. , 2001, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[26]  C. Strader,et al.  Muscarinic agonists and antagonists in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. , 2001, Farmaco.

[27]  A. Sali,et al.  Comparative protein structure modeling of genes and genomes. , 2000, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[28]  G M Shepherd,et al.  Molecular mechanisms underlying differential odor responses of a mouse olfactory receptor. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  K. Page,et al.  Scanning mutagenesis identifies amino acid side chains in transmembrane domain 5 of the M(1) muscarinic receptor that participate in binding the acetyl methyl group of acetylcholine. , 2000, Molecular pharmacology.

[30]  E. Hulme,et al.  A Network of Conserved Intramolecular Contacts Defines the Off-state of the Transmembrane Switch Mechanism in a Seven-transmembrane Receptor* , 2000, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[31]  D. Case,et al.  Generalized born models of macromolecular solvation effects. , 2000, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[32]  E. Hulme,et al.  Alanine-scanning mutagenesis of transmembrane domain 6 of the M(1) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor suggests that Tyr381 plays key roles in receptor function. , 1999, Molecular pharmacology.

[33]  E C Hulme,et al.  The Functional Topography of Transmembrane Domain 3 of the M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor, Revealed by Scanning Mutagenesis* , 1999, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[34]  Xi-Ping Huang,et al.  Roles of threonine 192 and asparagine 382 in agonist and antagonist interactions with M1 muscarinic receptors , 1999, British journal of pharmacology.

[35]  G. Schertler,et al.  Structure of rhodopsin , 1998, Eye.

[36]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. , 1998, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[37]  D. Sheehan,et al.  Site-directed mutagenesis on the m2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor: the significance of Tyr403 in the binding of agonists and functional coupling. , 1997, Molecular pharmacology.

[38]  Todd J. A. Ewing,et al.  Critical evaluation of search algorithms for automated molecular docking and database screening , 1997, J. Comput. Chem..

[39]  Susanne Trumpp-Kallmeyer,et al.  Modelling of the binding site of the human m1 muscarinic receptor: Experimental validation and refinement , 1997, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[40]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  Prediction of protein side-chain rotamers from a backbone-dependent rotamer library: a new homology modeling tool. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[41]  E. Hulme,et al.  The role of the aspartate-arginine-tyrosine triad in the m1 muscarinic receptor: mutations of aspartate 122 and tyrosine 124 decrease receptor expression but do not abolish signaling. , 1997, Molecular pharmacology.

[42]  D A Dougherty,et al.  Cation-pi interactions in aromatics of biological and medicinal interest: electrostatic potential surfaces as a useful qualitative guide. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  E C Hulme,et al.  Acetylcholine mustard labels the binding site aspartate in muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. , 1994, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[44]  S. L. Mayo,et al.  DREIDING: A generic force field for molecular simulations , 1990 .

[45]  J. Venter,et al.  Site-directed mutagenesis of m1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors: conserved aspartic acids play important roles in receptor function. , 1989, Molecular pharmacology.

[46]  R. Lathe Phd by thesis , 1988, Nature.

[47]  G A Petsko,et al.  Aromatic-aromatic interaction: a mechanism of protein structure stabilization. , 1985, Science.

[48]  J. Gasteiger,et al.  ITERATIVE PARTIAL EQUALIZATION OF ORBITAL ELECTRONEGATIVITY – A RAPID ACCESS TO ATOMIC CHARGES , 1980 .