Structural Determinants Regulating Expression of the High Affinity Leukotriene B4 Receptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutational analysis of determinants located in the C-terminal (C) tail of the high affinity leukotriene (LT) B(4) receptor, BLT1, was performed to assess their significance in BLT1 trafficking. When expressed in COS-7 cells, a BLT1 deletion mutant lacking the C-tail (G291stop) displayed higher numbers of binding sites and increased signal transduction compared with wild-type (WT) BLT1. Addition of the C-tail from either the platelet-activating factor receptor or the LTD(4) receptor, CysLT1, did not restore WT phenotype. Moreover, the number of LTB(4) binding sites was higher in the chimeras than in the WT BLT1, suggesting the requirement for specific structural determinants within the BLT1 C-tail. Elimination of a distal C-tail dileucine motif (Leu(304)-Leu(305)), but not the proximal (Leu(292)-Leu(293)) motif, altered BLT1 pharmacological characteristics and caused a moderate constitutive receptor activation. Surprisingly, all mutant receptors were efficiently delivered to the plasma membrane, but not to a greater extent than WT BLT1, as assessed by flow cytometry. Furthermore, substitution of Leu(304)-Leu(305) prevented LTB(4)-induced BLT1 internalization. Molecular modeling of BLT1 on the bovine rhodopsin receptor scaffold strongly suggested the involvement of the distal dileucine motif (Leu(304)-Leu(305)) in a hydrophobic core, including intrahelical interactions within alpha-helix VIII and interhelical interactions with residues of helix I. Disruption of this hydrophobic core is proposed to increase the population of receptors in the active form, to restrain their trafficking and to facilitate the activation of BLT1 as indicated by the increased maximal level of binding of the ligand and constitutive activation of the receptor.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".