Monomers and Oligomers of the M<sub>2</sub> Muscarinic Cholinergic Receptor Purified from <i>Sf</i>9 Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G protein-coupled receptors are known to form oligomers. To probe the nature of such aggregates, as well as the role and prevalence of monomers, epitope-tagged forms of the M(2) muscarinic receptor have been isolated as oligomers and monomers from Sf9 cells. Membranes from cells coexpressing the c-Myc- and FLAG-tagged receptor were solubilized in digitonin-cholate, and the receptor was purified by successive passage through DEAE-Sepharose, the affinity resin 3-(2'-aminobenzhydryloxy)tropane (ABT)-Sepharose, and hydroxyapatite. Coimmunoprecipitation of the two epitopes indicated the presence of oligomers at each stage of the purification up to but not including the fraction eluted specifically from ABT-Sepharose. The affinity-purified receptor therefore appeared to be monomeric. The failure to detect coimmunoprecipitation was not due to an ineffective antibody, nor did the conditions of purification appear to promote disaggregation. Receptor at all stages of purification bound N-[(3)H]methylscopolamine and [(3)H]quinuclidinylbenzilate with high affinity, but the capacity of receptors that were not retained on ABT-Sepharose was only 4% of that expected from densitometry of western blots probed with an anti-M(2) antibody. Similarly low activity was found with oligomers isolated by successive passage of coexpressed receptor on anti-c-Myc and anti-FLAG immunoaffinity columns. M(2) muscarinic receptors therefore appear to coexist as active monomers and largely or wholly inactive oligomers in solubilized extracts of Sf9 cells. A different pattern emerged when coinfected cells were treated with quinuclidinylbenzilate prior to solubilization, in that ABT-purified receptors from those cells exhibited coimmunoprecipitation. Treatment with the antagonist therefore led to oligomers in which at least some of the constituent sites were active and were retained by ABT-Sepharose.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".