It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Sucrose provides both sweetness and energy by binding to both Venus flytrap domains (VFD) of the heterodimeric sweet taste receptor (T1R2/T1R3). In contrast, non-caloric sweeteners such as sucralose and aspartame only bind to one specific domain (VFD2) of T1R2, resulting in high-intensity sweetness. In this study, we investigate the binding mechanism of various steviol glycosides, artificial sweeteners, and a negative allosteric modulator (lactisole) at four distinct binding sites: VFD2, VFD3, transmembrane domain 2 (TMD2), and TMD3 through binding experiments and computational docking studies. Our docking results reveal multiple binding sites for the tested ligands, including the radiolabeled ligands. Our experimental evidence demonstrates that the C20 carboxy terminus of the Gα protein can bind to the intracellular region of either TMD2 or TMD3, altering GPCR affinity to the high-affinity state for steviol glycosides. These findings provide a mechanistic understanding of the structure and function of this heterodimeric sweet taste receptor.
Sucrose and other non-caloric sweeteners can bind to different domains of the heterodimeric sweet taste receptor (T1R2/T1R3), resulting in different levels of sweetness. Here, the authors investigate the binding mechanism of various steviol glycosides, artificial sweeteners, and a negative allosteric modulator (lactisole) at four distinct binding sites of T1R2/T1R3 through binding experiments and computational docking studies, revealing multiple binding sites for the tested ligands and structural– function correlations of ligand–receptor interactions.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details





1 The University of Arizona, Wyant College of Optical Sciences and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tucson, USA (GRID:grid.134563.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2168 186X)
2 Global Core Research and Development Group, Plymouth, USA (GRID:grid.134563.6)
3 California Institute of Technology, Materials and Process Simulation Center (MSC), Pasadena, USA (GRID:grid.20861.3d) (ISNI:0000 0001 0706 8890)
4 Creative Campus Monheim, Cube Biotech, Monheim, Germany (GRID:grid.20861.3d)
5 Université de Bourgogne, Physiologie de Nutrition & Toxicologie, UB 1231 Center for Translational & Molecular Medicine (CTM), 21000 Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313)
6 Global Core Research and Development Group, Plymouth, USA (GRID:grid.5613.1)