MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Gβγ Subunits in the Organization, Assembly, and Function of GPCR Signaling Complexes

2008· review· en· W2143544378 on OpenAlexaff
Denis J. Dupré, Mélanie Robitaille, R. Victor Rebois, Terence E. Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalDalhousie University
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEffectorG protein-coupled receptorCell biologySignal transductionReceptorCell signalingG proteinProtein subunitBiologyChemistryFunction (biology)BiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of Gbetagamma subunits in cellular signaling has become well established in the past 20 years. Not only do they regulate effectors once thought to be the sole targets of Galpha subunits, but it has become clear that they also have a unique set of binding partners and regulate signaling pathways that are not always localized to the plasma membrane. However, this may be only the beginning of the story. Gbetagamma subunits interact with G protein-coupled receptors, Galpha subunits, and several different effector molecules during assembly and trafficking of receptor-based signaling complexes and not simply in response to ligand stimulation at sites of receptor cellular activity. Gbetagamma assembly itself seems to be tightly regulated via the action of molecular chaperones and in turn may serve a similar role in the assembly of specific signaling complexes. We propose that specific Gbetagamma subunits have a broader role in controlling the architecture, assembly, and activity of cellular signaling pathways.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations269
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and ToxicologySame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207