Natural ligands of nuclear receptors have conserved volumes (original) (raw)

Nature Structural Biology volume 5, pages 679–681 (1998)Cite this article

The nuclear receptor superfamily of proteins is composed of ligand-activated transcription factors that have a ligand binding domain (LBD) and a DNA binding domain (DBD)1. Recent structural studies of several different nuclear receptor LBDs with bound ligands have shown that this domain has a canonical fold consisting of 12 helices that bind a fully buried ligand in the hydrophobic core of the protein2,3,4,5. In each case the overall fold of the LBD is conserved and the ligand is bound entirely within the protein, completing the core as the protein refolds around it. Here, we show that despite the chemical diversity of the natural nuclear receptor ligands, the volumes of these ligands are highly conserved.

The sequence homology across the nuclear receptor superfamily indicates that these receptors evolved through divergent evolution5, but gives no information about the role of ligands in the evolution of these receptors. This is likely to have been important since function is conserved in evolution and these proteins are ligand-activated transcription factors. Furthermore, because the fully buried ligand plays a structural role by completing the hydrophobic core of the LBD in the active form of the receptor3, any new receptor arising from divergent evolution presumably needs a complementary ligand in order to convey a useful new function that would be selected during evolution. Considering this evolutionary argument in the context of the canonical LBD fold, one might expect the natural ligands of the nuclear receptors to be chemically similar to one another.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$259.00 per year

only $21.58 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

References

  1. Mangelsdorf, D.J. et al. Cell 83, 835–839 ( 1995).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  2. Renaud, J. et al. Nature 378, 681–689 ( 1995).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  3. Wagner, R.L. et al. Nature 378, 690–697 ( 1995).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Brzozowski, A.J. et al. Nature 389, 753–758 ( 1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  5. Wurtz, J.-M . et al. Nature Struct. Biol. 3, 87–94 (1996).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  6. Heyman, R.A. et al. Cell 68, 397–406 ( 1992).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. Levin, A.A. et al. Nature 355, 359–361 ( 1992).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  8. Enmark, E. & Gustafsson, J.-Å . Mol. Endocrinol. 10, 1293–1307 (1996).
    CAS PubMed Google Scholar
  9. Forman, B.M. et al. Cell 81, 687–693 ( 1995).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  10. Escriva, H. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 6803– 6808 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  11. Kliewer, S.A. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 4318– 4323 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Willson, T.M. & Wahli, W. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 1, 235–241 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Devchand, P.R., et al. Nature 384, 39–43 ( 1996).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  14. Lala, D.S. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 4895– 4900 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  15. Forman, B.M., Ruan, B., Chen, J., Schroepfer, G.J. Jr., & Evans, R.M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 10588–10593 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  16. Becker-Andre, M. et al. J. Biol. Chem. 269, 28531–28534 (1994).
    CAS PubMed Google Scholar
  17. Hazlerigg, D.G., Barrett, P., Hastings, M.H. & Morgan, P.J. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 123, 53–59 (1996).
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

A.A.B. is a National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellow. T.S.S. is an Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellow. This work was supported by grants from the NIH (to T.S.S and F.E.C.). We thank D. Chapin and R. Wagner for helpful discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Group in Biophysics, University of California , San Francisco, 94143, California, USA
    Andrew A. Bogan
  2. Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, 94143, California, USA
    Fred E. Cohen & Thomas S. Scanlan
  3. Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco, 94143 , California, USA
    Fred E. Cohen & Thomas S. Scanlan
  4. Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of California, San Francisco, 94143 , California, USA
    Fred E. Cohen
  5. Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 94143, California, USA
    Fred E. Cohen

Authors

  1. Andrew A. Bogan
  2. Fred E. Cohen
  3. Thomas S. Scanlan

Corresponding author

Correspondence toAndrew A. Bogan.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bogan, A., Cohen, F. & Scanlan, T. Natural ligands of nuclear receptors have conserved volumes.Nat Struct Mol Biol 5, 679–681 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/1372

Download citation

This article is cited by