MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The RCK2 Domain Uses a Coordination Site Present in Kir Channels to Confer Sodium Sensitivity to Slo2.2 Channels

2010· article· en· W2007850520 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhe Zhang, Avia Rosenhouse‐Dantsker, Qiong-Yao Tang, Sergei Y. Noskov, Diomedes E. Logothetis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIon channel regulation and function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchYale UniversityNational Institutes of HealthFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsGatingIon channelPotassium channelChemistryBiophysicsSodium channelLigand-gated ion channelIntracellularHomology modelingComputational biologyCell biologyBiologySodiumBiochemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Slo2 Na(+)-activated potassium channels are widely expressed in neurons and other cells, such as kidney, heart, and skeletal muscle. Although their important physiological roles continue to be appreciated, molecular determinants responsible for sensing intracellular Na(+) remain unknown. Here we report identification of an Na(+) regulatory site, similar to an Na(+) coordination motif described in Kir channels, localized in the RCK2 domain of Slo2.2 channels. Molecular simulations of the homology-modeled Slo2.2 RCK2 domain provided structural insights into the organization of this Na(+) coordination site. Furthermore, free energy calculations reproduced the experimentally derived monovalent cation selectivity. Our results suggest that Slo2.2 and Kir channels share a similar mechanism to coordinate Na(+). The localization of an Na(+) sensor within the RCK2 domain of Slo2.2 further supports the role of RCK (regulators of conductance of K(+)) domains of Slo channels in coupling ion sensing to channel gating.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations84
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicIon channel regulation and functionFrench-language works237,207