Abstract

Various TRP channels act as polymodal sensors of thermal and chemical stimuli, but the mechanisms whereby chemical ligands impact on TRP channel gating are poorly understood. Here we show that AITC (allyl isothiocyanate; mustard oil) and menthol represent two distinct types of ligands at the mammalian cold sensor TRPM8. Kinetic analysis of channel gating revealed that AITC acts by destabilizing the closed channel, whereas menthol stabilizes the open channel, relative to the transition state. Based on these differences, we classify agonists as either type I (menthol-like) or type II (AITC-like), and provide a kinetic model that faithfully reproduces their differential effects. We further demonstrate that type I and type II agonists have a distinct impact on TRPM8 currents and TRPM8-mediated calcium signals in excitable cells. These findings provide a theoretical framework for understanding the differential actions of TRP channel ligands, with important ramifications for TRP channel structure-function analysis and pharmacology.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Annelies Janssens

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Maarten Gees

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Balazs Istvan Toth

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Debapriya Ghosh

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Marie Mulier

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Rudi Vennekens

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Joris Vriens

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Karel Talavera

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Thomas Voets

    Laboratory of Ion Channel Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
    For correspondence
    thomas.voets@med.kuleuven.be
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5526-5821

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (G.0565.07)

  • Thomas Voets

Onderzoeksraad, KU Leuven (PF-TRPLe)

  • Rudi Vennekens
  • Thomas Voets

Belspo (IUAP P7/13)

  • Rudi Vennekens
  • Karel Talavera
  • Thomas Voets

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Kenton J Swartz, National Institutes of Health, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experiments were approved by the KU Leuven Ethical Committee Laboratory Animals under project number P192/2014.

Version history

  1. Received: April 25, 2016
  2. Accepted: July 22, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 23, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: July 25, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: August 15, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Annelies et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,574
    views
  • 567
    downloads
  • 23
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Annelies Janssens
  2. Maarten Gees
  3. Balazs Istvan Toth
  4. Debapriya Ghosh
  5. Marie Mulier
  6. Rudi Vennekens
  7. Joris Vriens
  8. Karel Talavera
  9. Thomas Voets
(2016)
Definition of two agonist types at the mammalian cold-activated channel TRPM8
eLife 5:e17240.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17240

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17240

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Damien M Rasmussen, Manny M Semonis ... Nicholas M Levinson
    Research Article

    The type II class of RAF inhibitors currently in clinical trials paradoxically activate BRAF at subsaturating concentrations. Activation is mediated by induction of BRAF dimers, but why activation rather than inhibition occurs remains unclear. Using biophysical methods tracking BRAF dimerization and conformation, we built an allosteric model of inhibitor-induced dimerization that resolves the allosteric contributions of inhibitor binding to the two active sites of the dimer, revealing key differences between type I and type II RAF inhibitors. For type II inhibitors the allosteric coupling between inhibitor binding and BRAF dimerization is distributed asymmetrically across the two dimer binding sites, with binding to the first site dominating the allostery. This asymmetry results in efficient and selective induction of dimers with one inhibited and one catalytically active subunit. Our allosteric models quantitatively account for paradoxical activation data measured for 11 RAF inhibitors. Unlike type II inhibitors, type I inhibitors lack allosteric asymmetry and do not activate BRAF homodimers. Finally, NMR data reveal that BRAF homodimers are dynamically asymmetric with only one of the subunits locked in the active αC-in state. This provides a structural mechanism for how binding of only a single αC-in inhibitor molecule can induce potent BRAF dimerization and activation.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Nicholas James Ose, Paul Campitelli ... Sefika Banu Ozkan
    Research Article

    We integrate evolutionary predictions based on the neutral theory of molecular evolution with protein dynamics to generate mechanistic insight into the molecular adaptations of the SARS-COV-2 spike (S) protein. With this approach, we first identified candidate adaptive polymorphisms (CAPs) of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein and assessed the impact of these CAPs through dynamics analysis. Not only have we found that CAPs frequently overlap with well-known functional sites, but also, using several different dynamics-based metrics, we reveal the critical allosteric interplay between SARS-CoV-2 CAPs and the S protein binding sites with the human ACE2 (hACE2) protein. CAPs interact far differently with the hACE2 binding site residues in the open conformation of the S protein compared to the closed form. In particular, the CAP sites control the dynamics of binding residues in the open state, suggesting an allosteric control of hACE2 binding. We also explored the characteristic mutations of different SARS-CoV-2 strains to find dynamic hallmarks and potential effects of future mutations. Our analyses reveal that Delta strain-specific variants have non-additive (i.e., epistatic) interactions with CAP sites, whereas the less pathogenic Omicron strains have mostly additive mutations. Finally, our dynamics-based analysis suggests that the novel mutations observed in the Omicron strain epistatically interact with the CAP sites to help escape antibody binding.