Knock-In Mice with NOP-eGFP Receptors Identify Receptor Cellular and Regional Localization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nociceptin/orphanin FQ (NOP) receptor, the fourth member of the opioid receptor family, is involved in many processes common to the opioid receptors including pain and drug abuse. To better characterize receptor location and trafficking, knock-in mice were created by inserting the gene encoding enhanced green fluorescent protein (eGFP) into the NOP receptor gene (Oprl1) and producing mice expressing a functional NOP-eGFP C-terminal fusion in place of the native NOP receptor. The NOP-eGFP receptor was present in brain of homozygous knock-in animals in concentrations somewhat higher than in wild-type mice and was functional when tested for stimulation of [(35)S]GTPγS binding in vitro and in patch-clamp electrophysiology in dorsal root ganglia (DRG) neurons and hippocampal slices. Inhibition of morphine analgesia was equivalent when tested in knock-in and wild-type mice. Imaging revealed detailed neuroanatomy in brain, spinal cord, and DRG and was generally consistent with in vitro autoradiographic imaging of receptor location. Multicolor immunohistochemistry identified cells coexpressing various spinal cord and DRG cellular markers, as well as coexpression with μ-opioid receptors in DRG and brain regions. Both in tissue slices and primary cultures, the NOP-eGFP receptors appear throughout the cell body and in processes. These knock-in mice have NOP receptors that function both in vitro and in vivo and appear to be an exceptional tool to study receptor neuroanatomy and correlate with NOP receptor function. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The NOP receptor, the fourth member of the opioid receptor family, is involved in pain, drug abuse, and a number of other CNS processes. The regional and cellular distribution has been difficult to determine due to lack of validated antibodies for immunohistochemical analysis. To provide a new tool for the investigation of receptor localization, we have produced knock-in mice with a fluorescent-tagged NOP receptor in place of the native NOP receptor. These knock-in mice have NOP receptors that function both in vitro and in vivo and have provided a detailed characterization of NOP receptors in brain, spinal cord, and DRG neurons. They appear to be an exceptional tool to study receptor neuroanatomy and correlate with NOP receptor function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".