Residues 293 and 294 Are Ligand Contact Points of the Human Angiotensin Type 1 Receptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human angiotensin II type 1 receptor (hAT(1)) was photolabeled with a high-affinity radiolabeled photoreactive analogue of AngII, (125)I-[Sar(1), Val(5), p-Benzoyl-L-phenylalanine(8)]AngII ((125)I-[Sar(1),Bpa(8)]AngII). Chemical cleavage with CNBr produced a 7 kDa fragment (285-334) of the C-terminal portion of the hAT(1). Manual Edman radiosequencing of photolabeled, per-acetylated, and CNBr-fragmented receptor showed that ligand incorporation occurred through Phe(293) and Asn(294) within the seventh transmembrane domain of the hAT(1). Receptor mutants with Met introduced at the presumed contact residues, F293M and N294M, were photolabeled and then digested with CNBr. SDS-PAGE analysis of those digested mutant receptors confirmed the contact positions 293 and 294 through ligand release induced by CNBr digestion. Additional receptor mutants with Met residues introduced into the N- and C-terminal proximity of those residues 293 and 294 of the hAT(1) produced, upon photolabeling and CNBr digestion, fragmentation patterns compatible only with the above contact residues. These data indicate that the C-terminal residue of AngII interacts with residues 293 and 294 of the seventh transmembrane domain of the human AT(1) receptor. Taking into account a second receptor-ligand contact at the second extracellular loop and residue 3 of AngII (Boucard, A. A., Wilkes, B. C., Laporte, S. A., Escher, E., Guillemette, G., and Leduc, R. (2000) Biochemistry 39, 9662-70) the Ang II molecule must adopt an extended structure in the AngII binding pocket.
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) | 0.002 | 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".