Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2025

An Analytical Tool that Quantifies Cellular Morphology Changes from Three-dimensional Fluorescence Images
Published on: August 31, 2012
Comparative analysis of formyl peptide receptor 1 and formyl peptide receptor 2 reveals shared and preserved
Denise Pajonczyk1, Merle F Sternschulte1,2, Oliver Soehnlein2
1Research Group Cellular Biochemistry - Regulatory Mechanisms of Inflammation, Institute of Molecular Virology, Center of Molecular Biology of Inflammation and "Cells in Motion" Interfaculty Centre, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Background And Purpose:
The pattern recognition receptors, formyl peptide receptors, FPR1 and FPR2, are G protein-coupled receptors that recognize many different pathogen- and host-derived ligands. While FPR1 conveys pro-inflammatory signals, FPR2 is linked with pro-resolving outcomes. To analyse how the two very similar FPRs exert opposite effects in modulating inflammatory responses despite their high homology, a shared expression profile on immune cells and an overlapping ligand repertoire, we questioned whether the signalling profile differs between these two receptors.
Experimental Approach:
We deduced EC50 and Emax values for synthetic, pathogen-derived and host-derived peptide agonists for both FPR1 and FPR2 and analysed them within the framework of biased signalling. We furthermore investigated whether FPR isoform-specific agonists affect the ex vivo lifespan of human neutrophils.
Key Results:
The FPRs share a core signature across signalling pathways. Whereas the synthetic WKYMVm and formylated peptides acted as potent agonists at FPR1, and at FPR2, only WKYMVm was a full agonist. Natural FPR2 agonists, irrespective of N-terminal formylation, displayed lower activity ratios, suggesting an underutilized signalling potential of this receptor. FPR2 agonism did not counteract LPS-induced neutrophil survival, indicating that FPR2 activation per se is not linked with a pro-resolving function.
Conclusion And Implications:
Activation of FPR1 and FPR2 by a representative agonist panel revealed a lack of a receptor-specific signalling texture, challenging assumptions about distinct inflammatory profiles linked to specific receptor isoforms, signalling patterns or agonist classes. These conclusions are restricted to the specific agonists and signalling pathways examined.
Linked Articles:
This article is part of a themed issue Drugs and Drug Targets in Metabolic and Chronic Inflammatory Diseases. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v182.20/issuetoc.
Related Concept Videos
Amplifying Signals via Second Messengers
Transducer Mechanism: G Protein–Coupled Receptors
GPCRs are also called heptahelical,...
Interactions Between Signaling Pathways
Convergence and divergence, and cross-talk between signaling pathways
Two distinct signaling pathways can converge on a single functional unit, which may either be a single protein or a complex of proteins. The response is either functionally distinct or synergistic between the two pathways but different from the response...
What are Second Messengers?
Assembly of Signaling Complexes
Interaction domains in cell signaling
Interaction domains recognize exposed features of their binding partners containing post-translationally modified sequences,...

