Sandbox Reserved 1701: Difference between revisions
From Proteopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
[[Image:Screen Shot 2022-03-15 at 10.23.20 AM.png|200px|left|thumb|'''Figure 4.''' ERC Motif]] | [[Image:Screen Shot 2022-03-15 at 10.23.20 AM.png|200px|left|thumb|'''Figure 4.''' ERC Motif]] | ||
The E/DRY motif in most class A GPCRs is responsible for forming salt bridges with surrounding residues and TM6. These salt bridges maintain the inactive conformation of the receptor until ligand binding breaks the ionic "lock" from these interactions. MRGPRX2 has an <scene name='90/904306/Erc_motif_3/1'>ERC Motif</scene> rather than the typically [https://proteopedia.org/wiki/index.php/A_Physical_Model_of_the_%CE%B22-Adrenergic_Receptor#conserved%20DRY%20motif conserved E/DRY Motif]. The amino acid residue shift from TYR-174 to CYS-128 allows compaction of the helices in MRGPRX2 where the standard TYR physically pushes the TMD helices apart('''Figure 4'''). The conserved residues E and R still form salt bridges with nearby residues. This and the closer packing of the helices contribute to a less significant TMD conformational change upon ligand binding ('''Figure 10'''). | The E/DRY motif in most class A GPCRs is responsible for forming salt bridges with surrounding residues and TM6. These salt bridges maintain the inactive conformation of the receptor until ligand binding breaks the ionic "lock" from these interactions. MRGPRX2 has an <scene name='90/904306/Erc_motif_3/1'>ERC Motif</scene> rather than the typically [https://proteopedia.org/wiki/index.php/A_Physical_Model_of_the_%CE%B22-Adrenergic_Receptor#conserved%20DRY%20motif conserved E/DRY Motif]. The amino acid residue shift from TYR-174 to CYS-128 allows compaction of the helices in MRGPRX2 where the standard TYR physically pushes the TMD helices apart('''Figure 4'''). The conserved residues E and R still form salt bridges with nearby residues. This and the closer packing of the helices contribute to a less significant TMD conformational change upon ligand binding ('''Figure 10'''). | ||