Expression of Ca<sub>V</sub>2.2 and Splice Variants of Ca<sub>V</sub>2.1 in Oxytocin‐ and Vasopressin‐Releasing Supraoptic Neurones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnocellular neurosecretory cells (MNCs) release vasopressin (VP) and oxytocin (OT) from their axon terminals into the circulation and from their somata and dendrites to exert paracrine effects on other MNCs. MNCs express several types of voltage-gated Ca(2+) channels, including Ca(V)2.1 and Ca(V)2.2. These two channels types are similar in structure and function in other cells, but although influx of Ca(2+) through Ca(V)2.2 triggers the release of both OT and VP into the circulation, Ca(V)2.1 is involved in stimulating the release of VP but not OT. Release of OT from MNC somata is also triggered by Ca(V)2.2 but not Ca(V)2.1. These observations could be explained by differences in the level of expression of Ca(V)2.1 in VP and OT MNCs or by differences in the way that the two channels interact with the exocytotic apparatus. We used immunohistochemistry to confirm earlier work suggesting that MNCs express variants of Ca(V)2.1 lacking portions of an internal loop that enables the channels to interact with synaptic proteins. We used an antibody that would recognise both the full-length Ca(V)2.1 and the deletion variants to show that OT MNCs express fewer Ca(V)2.1 channels than do VP MNCs in both somata and axon terminals. We used the reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and immunocytochemistry to test whether MNCs express similar deletion variants of Ca(V)2.2 and were unable to find any evidence to support this. Our data suggest that the different roles that Ca(V)2.1 and Ca(V)2.2 play in MNC secretion may be a result of the different levels of expression of Ca(V)2.1 in VP and OT MNCs, as well as the expression in MNCs of deletion variants of Ca(V)2.1 that do not interact with exocytotic proteins and therefore may be less likely to mediate exocytotic release.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".