Coexpression of Somatostatin Receptor Subtype 5 Affects Internalization and Trafficking of Somatostatin Receptor Subtype 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The somatostatin [somatotropin release-inhibiting factor (SRIF)] receptor subtypes sst(2A) and sst(5) are frequently coexpressed in SRIF-responsive cells, including endocrine pituitary cells. We previously demonstrated that sst(2A) and sst(5) exhibit different subcellular localizations and regulation of cell surface expression, although they have similar signaling properties. We investigated here whether sst(2A) and sst(5) functionally interact in cells coexpressing the two receptor subtypes. We stimulated both transfected cells stably expressing sst(2A) alone (CHO-sst(2A)) or together with sst(5) (CHO-sst(2A+5)) and the pituitary cell line AtT20, which endogenously expresses the two receptor subtypes, with either the nonselective agonist [D-Trp(8)]-SRIF-14 or the sst(2)-selective agonist L-779,976. In CHO-sst(2A) cells, stimulation with either ligand resulted in the loss of approximately 75% of cell surface SRIF binding sites and massive internalization of sst(2A) receptors. The cells were desensitized to subsequent stimulation with [D-Trp(8)]-SRIF-14, which failed to inhibit forskolin-evoked cAMP accumulation. Similarly, in CHO-sst(2A+5) and AtT20 cells, [D-Trp(8)]-SRIF-14 induced the loss of 60-70% of SRIF binding sites as well as massive sst(2A) endocytosis. By contrast, in cells expressing both sst(2A) and sst(5), selective stimulation of sst(2A) with L-779,976 resulted in only 20-40% loss of cell surface binding and markedly reduced sst(2A) internalization. Consequently, whereas CHO-sst(2A+5) and AtT20 cells stimulated with [D-Trp(8)]-SRIF-14 were desensitized to a second stimulation with the same agonist, cells prestimulated with L-779,976 were not desensitized to subsequent [D-Trp(8)]-SRIF-14 stimulation. These findings indicate that the presence of sst(5) in the same cells modulates trafficking and cell surface regulation of sst(2A) and cellular desensitization to the effects of SRIF.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".