Role of Carboxylate Residues Adjacent to the Conserved Core Walker B Motifs in the Catalytic Cycle of Multidrug Resistance Protein 1 (ABCC1)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MRP1 belongs to subfamily "C" of the ABC transporter superfamily. The nucleotide-binding domains (NBDs) of the C family members are relatively divergent compared with many ABC proteins. They also differ in their ability to bind and hydrolyze ATP. In MRP1, NBD1 binds ATP with high affinity, whereas NBD2 is hydrolytically more active. Furthermore, ATP binding and/or hydrolysis by NBD2 of MRP1, but not NBD1, is required for MRP1 to shift from a high to low affinity substrate binding state. Little is known of the structural basis for these functional differences. One minor structural difference between NBDs is the presence of Asp COOH-terminal to the conserved core Walker B motif in NBD1, rather than the more commonly found Glu present in NBD2. We show that the presence of Asp or Glu following the Walker B motif profoundly affects the ability of the NBDs to bind, hydrolyze, and release nucleotide. An Asp to Glu mutation in NBD1 enhances its hydrolytic capacity and affinity for ADP but markedly decreases transport activity. In contrast, mutations that eliminate the negative charge of the Asp side chain have little effect. The decrease in transport caused by the Asp to Glu mutation in NBD1 is associated with an inability of MRP1 to shift from high to low affinity substrate binding states. In contrast, mutation of Glu to Asp markedly increases the affinity of NBD2 for ATP while decreasing its ability to hydrolyze ATP and to release ADP. This mutation eliminates transport activity but potentiates the conversion from a high to low affinity binding state in the presence of nucleotide. These observations are discussed in the context of catalytic models proposed for MRP1 and other ABC drug transport proteins.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".