MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Characterization of a novel D2‐like dopamine receptor with a truncated splice variant and a D1‐like dopamine receptor unique to invertebrates from <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2005· article· en· W1849896091 on OpenAlexafffund
Mai Sugiura, Satoshi Fuke, Satoshi Suo, Noboru Sasagawa, Hubert H.M. Van Tol, Shoichi Ishiura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDopamineBiologyDopamine receptorReceptorDopaminergicForskolinCell biologyDopamine receptor D2Molecular biologyEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have cloned two novel Caenorhabditis elegans dopamine receptors, DOP-3 and DOP-4. DOP-3 shows high sequence homology with other D2-like dopamine receptors. As a result of alternative splicing, a truncated splice variant of DOP-3, DOP-3nf, was produced. Because of the in-frame insertion of a stop codon in the third intracellular loop, DOP-3nf lacks the sixth and seventh transmembrane domains that are found in the full-length DOP-3 receptor. Reporter gene assay showed that DOP-3 attenuates forskolin-stimulated cAMP formation in response to dopamine stimulation, whereas DOP-3nf does not. When DOP-3 was coexpressed with DOP-3nf, the ability to inhibit forskolin-stimulated cAMP formation was reduced. DOP-4 shows high sequence homology with D1-like dopamine receptors unique to invertebrates, which are distinct from mammalian D1-like dopamine receptors. Reporter gene assay showed that DOP-4 stimulates cAMP accumulation in response to dopamine stimulation. These two receptors provide new opportunities to understand dopaminergic signaling at the molecular level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207