Caveolae Facilitate but Are Not Essential for Platelet-Activating Factor-Mediated Calcium Mobilization and Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase Activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Certain proteins, including receptors and signaling molecules, are known to be enriched in caveolae and lipid rafts. Caveolin-1, the major structural protein of caveolae, specifically interacts with many signaling molecules and, thus, caveolae and lipid rafts are often seen as preassembled signaling platforms. A potential binding site for caveolin-1 is present in the platelet-activating factor receptor (PAFR) sequence, and many downstream signaling components of PAFR activation preferentially localize in caveolae. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the PAFR was localized in caveolae/lipid raft domains and, if so, what would be the significance of such localization for PAFR signaling. In this study, we demonstrate that PAFR localizes within membrane microdomains, in close proximity to caveolin-1 in living cells, with potential interaction through a caveolin-1-binding sequence in the PAFR C terminus. Caveolin-1, however, is not essential for PAFR localization in lipid rafts. Disruption of caveolae/lipid rafts with methyl-beta-cyclodextrin markedly reduced PAF-triggered inositol phosphate production and cytosolic calcium flux, suggesting that PAFR signaling through the Galphaq protein was critically dependent on integrity of lipid rafts and/or caveolae. Interestingly, whereas in caveolin-1-expressing cells lipid raft disruption markedly decreased PAFR-mediated activation of the ERK/MAPK pathway, in cells lacking caveolae, such as leukocytes, lipid raft disruption had either the same inhibitory effect (Ramos B cells) or no effect (monocytes) on PAFR capacity to signal through the ERK/MAPK pathway. In conclusion, PAFR appears to localize within caveolae or lipid rafts in different cell types, and this location may be important for specific signaling events.
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 | 0.001 | 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".