Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 4, 2026

Detection of Ligand-activated G Protein-coupled Receptor Internalization by Confocal Microscopy
Published on: April 9, 2017
Different vasoactive intestinal polypeptide receptor domains are involved in the selective recognition of two
M G Juarranz1, J Van Rampelbergh, P Gourlet
1Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract:
A vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP) analog, acylated on the amino-terminal histidine by hexanoic acid (C(6)-VIP), behaved as a VPAC(2) preferring agonist in binding and functional studies on human VIP receptors, and radioiodinated C(6)-VIP was a suitable ligand for binding studies on wild-type and chimeric receptors. We evaluated the properties of C(6)-VIP, its analog AcHis(1)-VIP, and the VPAC(2)-selective agonist Ro 25-1553 on the wild-type VPAC(1) and VPAC(2) receptors and on the chimeric receptors exchanging the different domains between both receptors. VIP had a normal affinity and efficacy on the chimeras starting with the amino-terminal VPAC(2) receptor sequence. The binding and functional profile of these chimeric receptors suggested that the high affinity of Ro 25-1553 for VPAC(2) receptors is supported by the amino-terminal extracellular domain, whereas the ability to prefer C(6)-VIP over VIP is supported by the VPAC(2) fifth transmembrane (TM5)-EC(3) receptor domain. These results further support the hypothesis that the central and carboxyl-terminal regions of the peptide (modified in RO 25-1553) recognize the extracellular amino-terminal region domain, whereas the amino-terminal VIP amino acids bind to the TM receptor core. VIP had a reduced affinity and efficacy on the N-VPAC(1)/VPAC(2) and on the N-->EC(2)-VPAC(1)/VPAC(2) chimeric receptors. C(6)-VIP behaved as a high-affinity agonist on these constructions. The antagonists [AcHis(1),D-Phe(2),Lys(15),Arg(16), Leu(27)]VIP(3-7)/GRF(8-27) and VIP(5-27) had comparable affinities for the wild-type receptors and for the two latter chimeras, supporting the hypothesis that these chimeras were properly folded but unable to reach the high-agonist-affinity, active receptor conformation in response to VIP binding.
More Related Videos
08:16Detection of G Protein-coupled Receptor Expression in Mouse Vagal Afferent Neurons using Multiplex In Situ Hybridization
Published on: September 20, 2021
10:31A Liposome Membrane Permeability Assay for Investigating the Effects of Phosphatidylinositol Phosphate Groups on Membranotropic Action of Venom PLA2
Published on: September 26, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Phosphoinositides and PIPs
Different phosphoinositides are synthesized and recruited on the cytosolic face of the plasma membrane. The localization of specific phosphoinositides concentrated in separate membrane...
GPCR Desensitization
IP3/DAG Signaling Pathway
Selectins
Transducer Mechanism: G Protein–Coupled Receptors
GPCRs are also called heptahelical, 7TM, or...
The Two-State Receptor Model
The binding affinity of a drug determines its interaction with one...