Thermodynamic stoichiometry of Na<sup>+</sup>-coupled glutathione transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ambiguity exists with respect to mechanisms of glutathione (GSH) transport and the molecular identity of GSH transporters. Empirical and theoretical limitations have hindered functional and molecular characterizations. Published literature referring to the isolation and molecular identification of Na+-coupled GSH transporters that mediate the cellular uptake of GSH is highly debated. Whereas a number of functional and kinetic reports of this putative symport mechanism exist, the hypothetical transmembrane Na+-coupled GSH transporter protein or the genetic message encoding it has not been isolated. Theoretical thermodynamic calculations to support the concept of secondary active GSH transport and to rationalize accounts of physical-kinetic measurements describing Na+-coupled cellular GSH uptake were performed. The adequacy of requisite energy and stoichiometric conservation of the separate electrical and chemical components of a Na+ gradient in maintaining a high cellular accumulation gradient for GSH was examined through a purely phenomenological perspective. Dependent on the biological context, the energetic coupling between Na+ and GSH cotransport may occur at ratios from 1:1 to 3:1. Molecular identification of specific transporters responsible for cellular Na+-coupled GSH uptake will facilitate determination of their relative contribution to the overall plasma membrane resting potential. In tissues with a high GSH concentration relative to their extracellular milieu, particularly in pathologies of cystic fibrosis and dry eye syndromes, large energy coupling ratios in cotransport of Na+ and GSH may be expected. Na+-coupled GSH transport may play an important role in disease onset and (or) progression, or treatment modalities thereof.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".