Properties of the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide I and II receptors, vasoactive intestinal peptide1, and chimeric amino-terminal pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide/vasoactive intestinal peptide1 receptors: evidence for multiple receptor states.

We analyzed the functional and binding properties of the "normal" pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (N-PACAP) type I, PACAP type II/vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP)1, and chimeric N-PACAP/VIP1 receptors expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells. The binding properties of the three receptors were investigated using three radioiodinated tracers: 125I-VIP, 125I-PACAP-27, and 125I-PACAP-29 (125I-PACAP-27-Gly28,Lys29-amide). The three tracers labeled very different receptor densities; 125I-PACAP-29 labeled more receptors than either 125I-VIP or 125I-PACAP-27 in the three cell lines. Analysis of the competition curves suggested that the three tracers labeled in a different manner three PACAP I receptor states, two PACAP II/VIP1 receptor states, and three chimeric N-PACAP/VIP1 receptor states in transfected Chinese hamster ovary cells. The previously described PACAP1A and PACAP1B receptors, which differ by their affinities for PACAP-27 and PACAP-38, actually correspond to different PACAP I receptor states. The three receptors were able to increase adenylate cyclase activity when activated by PACAP-38, PACAP-27, or VIP. In contrast with the two parent receptors, the chimeric N-PACAP/VIP1 receptor was activated by PACAP-38 at lower concentrations than PACAP-27, suggesting that the amino-terminal and core receptor domains influence each other and that the conformation of one or both domains was altered in the chimeric compared with wild-type receptors. Comparison of the binding and functional properties of three clones expressing different chimeric N-PACAP/VIP1 receptors densities indicated that 125I-PACAP-29 was necessary to correctly estimate the receptor number and that 125I-PACAP-27 or 125I-VIP labeled only a fraction of the functional receptors. We suspect (but could not demonstrate) that this might also be true for PACAP I and PACAP II/VIP1 receptors.