Laminin‐γ1 chain and stress inducible protein 1 synergistically mediate Pr<scp>P<sup>C</sup></scp>‐dependent axonal growth via Ca<sup>2+</sup> mobilization in dorsal root ganglia neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prion protein (PrP(C)) is a cell surface glycoprotein that is abundantly expressed in nervous system. The elucidation of the PrP(C) interactome network and its significance on neural physiology is crucial to understanding neurodegenerative events associated with prion and Alzheimer's diseases. PrP(C) co-opts stress inducible protein 1/alpha7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (STI1/α7nAChR) or laminin/Type I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1/5) to modulate hippocampal neuronal survival and differentiation. However, potential cross-talk between these protein complexes and their role in peripheral neurons has never been addressed. To explore this issue, we investigated PrP(C)-mediated axonogenesis in peripheral neurons in response to STI1 and laminin-γ1 chain-derived peptide (Ln-γ1). STI1 and Ln-γ1 promoted robust axonogenesis in wild-type neurons, whereas no effect was observed in neurons from PrP(C) -null mice. PrP(C) binding to Ln-γ1 or STI1 led to an increase in intracellular Ca(2+) levels via distinct mechanisms: STI1 promoted extracellular Ca(2+) influx, and Ln-γ1 released calcium from intracellular stores. Both effects depend on phospholipase C activation, which is modulated by mGluR1/5 for Ln-γ1, but depends on, C-type transient receptor potential (TRPC) channels rather than α7nAChR for STI1. Treatment of neurons with suboptimal concentrations of both ligands led to synergistic actions on PrP(C)-mediated calcium response and axonogenesis. This effect was likely mediated by simultaneous binding of the two ligands to PrP(C). These results suggest a role for PrP(C) as an organizer of diverse multiprotein complexes, triggering specific signaling pathways and promoting axonogenesis in the peripheral nervous system.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".