Crystallographic Studies with Xenon and Nitrous Oxide Provide Evidence for Protein-dependent Processes in the Mechanisms of General Anesthesia
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
BACKGROUND: The mechanisms by which general anesthetics, including xenon and nitrous oxide, act are only beginning to be discovered. However, structural approaches revealed weak but specific protein-gas interactions. METHODS: To improve knowledge, we performed x-ray crystallography studies under xenon and nitrous oxide pressure in a series of 10 binding sites within four proteins. RESULTS: Whatever the pressure, we show (1) hydrophobicity of the gas binding sites has a screening effect on xenon and nitrous oxide binding, with a threshold value of 83% beyond which and below which xenon and nitrous oxide, respectively, binds to their sites preferentially compared to each other; (2) xenon and nitrous oxide occupancies are significantly correlated respectively to the product and the ratio of hydrophobicity by volume, indicating that hydrophobicity and volume are binding parameters that complement and oppose each other's effects; and (3) the ratio of occupancy of xenon to nitrous oxide is significantly correlated to hydrophobicity of their binding sites. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that xenon and nitrous oxide obey different binding mechanisms, a finding that argues against all unitary hypotheses of narcosis and anesthesia, and indicate that the Meyer-Overton rule of a high correlation between anesthetic potency and solubility in lipids of general anesthetics is often overinterpreted. This study provides evidence that the mechanisms of gas binding to proteins and therefore of general anesthesia should be considered as the result of a fully reversible interaction between a drug ligand and a receptor as this occurs in classical pharmacology.
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