Engineered Cx26 variants established functional heterotypic Cx26/Cx43 and Cx26/Cx40 gap junction channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gap junction (GJ) channels mediate direct intercellular communication and are composed of two docked hemichannels (connexin oligomers). It is well documented that the docking and formation of GJs are possible only between compatible hemichannels (or connexins). The mechanisms of heterotypic docking compatibility are not fully clear. We aligned the protein sequences of docking-compatible and -incompatible connexins with that of connexin26 (Cx26). We found that two docking hydrogen bond (HB)-forming residues on the second extracellular domain (E2) of Cx26 and their equivalent residues are well conserved within docking-compatible connexins, but different between docking-incompatible connexins. Replacing one or both of these residues of Cx26 into the corresponding residues in the docking incompatible connexins (K168V, N176H or K168V-N176H) increased the formation of morphological and functional heterotypic GJs with connexin43 (Cx43) or connexin40 (Cx40), indicating that these two residues are important for docking incompatibility between Cx26 and these connexins. Our homology structure models predict that both HBs and hydrophobic interactions at the E2 docking interface are important docking mechanisms in heterotypic Cx26 K168V-N176H/Cx43 GJs and probably other docking compatible connexins. Revealing the key residues and mechanisms of heterotypic docking compatibility will assist us in understanding why these putative docking residues are hotspots of disease-linked mutants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".