Relative Movements of Transmembrane Regions at the Outer Mouth of the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Channel Pore during Channel Gating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple transmembrane (TM) segments line the pore of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator Cl(-) channel; however, the relative alignment of these TMs and their relative movements during channel gating are unknown. To gain three-dimensional structural information on the outer pore, we have used patch clamp recording to study the proximity of pairs of cysteine side chains introduced into TMs 6 and 11, using both disulfide cross-linking and Cd(2+) coordination. Following channel activation, disulfide bonds could apparently be formed between three cysteine pairs (of 15 studied): R334C/T1122C, R334C/G1127C, and T338C/S1118C. To examine the state dependence of cross-linking, we combined these cysteine mutations with a nucleotide-binding domain mutation (E1371Q) that stabilizes the channel open state. Investigation of the effects of the E1371Q mutation on disulfide bond formation and Cd(2+) coordination suggests that although R334C/T1122C and T338C/S1118C are closer together in the channel open state, R334C/G1127C are close together and can form disulfide bonds only when the channel is closed. These results provide important new information on the three-dimensional structure of the outer mouth of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator channel pore: TMs 6 and 11 are close enough together to form disulfide bonds in both open and closed channels. Moreover, the altered relative locations of residues in open and in closed channels that we infer allow us to propose that channel opening and closing may be associated with a relative translational movement of TMs 6 and 11, with TM6 moving "down" (toward the cytoplasm) during channel opening.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".