A homology model of the pore domain of a voltage-gated calcium channel is consistent with available SCAM data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the absence of x-ray structures of calcium channels, their homology models are used to rationalize experimental data and design new experiments. The modeling relies on sequence alignments between calcium and potassium channels. Zhen et al. (2005. J. Gen. Physiol. doi:10.1085/jgp.200509292) used the substituted cysteine accessibility method (SCAM) to identify pore-lining residues in the Ca(v)2.1 channel and concluded that their data are inconsistent with the symmetric architecture of the pore domain and published sequence alignments between calcium and potassium channels. Here, we have built K(v)1.2-based models of the Ca(v)2.1 channel with 2-(trimethylammonium)ethyl methanethiosulfonate (MTSET)-modified engineered cysteines and used Monte Carlo energy minimizations to predict their energetically optimal orientations. We found that depending on the position of an engineered cysteine in S6 and S5 helices, the ammonium group in the long flexible MTSET-modified side chain can orient into the inner pore, an interface between domains (repeats), or an interface between S5 and S6 helices. Different local environments of equivalent positions in the four repeats can lead to different SCAM results. The reported current inhibition by MTSET generally decreases with the predicted distances between the ammonium nitrogen and the pore axis. A possible explanation for outliers of this correlation is suggested. Our calculations rationalize the SCAM data, validate one of several published sequence alignments between calcium and potassium channels, and suggest similar spatial dispositions of S5 and S6 helices in voltage-gated potassium and calcium channels.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".