Mechanistic Basis for Kinetic Differences between the Rat α1, α2, and α3 Isoforms of the Na,K-ATPase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies showed that the alpha 1, alpha 2, and alpha 3 isoforms of the catalytic subunit of the Na,K-ATPase differ in their apparent affinities for the ligands ATP, Na(+), and K(+). For the rat isoforms transfected into HeLa cells, K'(ATP) for ATP binding at its low affinity site is lower for alpha 2 and alpha 3 compared with alpha 1; relative to alpha 1 and alpha 2, alpha 3 has a higher K'(Na) and lower K'(K) (Jewell, E. A., and Lingrel, J. B (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266, 16925--16930; Munzer, J. S., Daly, S. E., Jewell-Motz, E. A., Lingrel, J. B, and Blostein, R. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 16668--16676). The experiments described in the present study provide insight into the mechanistic basis for these differences. The results show that alpha 2 differs from alpha1 primarily by a shift in the E(1) E(2) equilibrium in favor of E(1) form(s) as evidenced by (i) a approximately 20-fold increase in IC(50) for vanadate, (ii) decreased catalytic turnover, and (iii) notable stability of Na,K-ATPase activity at acidic pH. In contrast, despite its lower K'(ATP) compared with alpha 1, the E(1) E(2) poise of alpha 3 is not shifted toward E(1). Distinct intrinsic interactions with Na(+) ions are underscored by the marked selectivity for Na(+) over Li(+) of alpha 3 compared with either alpha1 or alpha 2 and higher K'(Na) for cytoplasmic Na(+), which persists over a 100-fold range in proton concentration, independent of the presence of K(+). The kinetic analysis also suggests alpha 3-specific differences in relative rates of partial reactions, which impact this isoform's distinct apparent affinities for both Na(+) and K(+).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".