Functional Endothelin Receptors Are Present on Nuclei in Cardiac Ventricular Myocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endothelins are thought to act through two specific, plasmalemmal G protein-coupled receptor subtypes, ETAR and ETBR. However, in subfractionated cardiac membranes, ETAR immunoreactivity was detected only in the plasma membrane whereas ETBR immunoreactivity was detected predominantly in membranes of intracellular origin. Confocal microscopy demonstrated the presence of intracellular ETAR and ETBR in ventricular myocytes. ETAR were primarily on plasma membrane (surface membranes and transverse-tubules) and to a lesser extent on the nucleus while ETBR localized primarily to the nuclei. Western blot analysis of nuclei isolated from the heart indicated the presence of endothelin receptors: both ETAR and ETBR copurified with nucleoporin 62, whereas markers of endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi membranes were depleted. Radioligand binding studies revealed that isolated nuclei contain specific [125I]ET-1 binding sites. Specific [125I]ET-1 binding was reduced by 70-80% using the ETAR-selective antagonist BQ610 and 20-30% using the ETBR-specific antagonist BQ788. IRL-1620, an ETBR-specific agonist, also reduced [125I]ET-1 binding. Furthermore, ET-1 and IRL-1620 altered the incorporation of 32P into nuclear proteins and caused a transient increase in nuclear Ca2+ concentration. Hence, cardiac nuclei possess both ETAR and ETBR subtypes, which are functional with respect to ligand binding and are coupled to signaling mechanisms within the nuclear membrane.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".