TRH-R2 Exhibits Similar Binding and Acute Signaling but Distinct Regulation and Anatomic Distribution Compared with TRH-R1
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TRH (thyroliberin) is a tripeptide (pGlu-His-ProNH2) that signals via G protein-coupled receptors. Until recently, only a single receptor for TRH was known (TRH-R1), but two groups identified a second receptor, TRH-R2. We independently discovered TRH-R2. Using an extensive set of TRH analogs, we found no differences in TRH-R1 and TRH-R2 binding or in acute stimulation of signaling. TRH-R2 was more rapidly internalized upon binding TRH and exhibited a greater level of TRH-induced down-regulation than TRH-R1. During prolonged exposure to TRH, cells expressing TRH-R2 exhibited a lower level of gene induction than cells expressing TRH-R1. TRH-R2 receptor mRNA was present in very discrete nuclei and regions of rat brain. A major mRNA transcript for TRH-R2 was seen in the cerebral cortex, pons, thalamus, hypothalamus, and midbrain with faint bands found in the striatum and pituitary. The extensive distribution of TRH-R2 in the brain suggests that it mediates many of the known functions of TRH that are not transduced by TRH-R1. The variations in agonist-induced internalization and down-regulation/desensitization, and anatomic distribution of TRH-R2 compared with TRH-R1, suggest important functional differences between the two receptors.
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.
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 it