MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154197432 · doi:10.1196/annals.1254.010

Structure and Function of AChBP, Homologue of the Ligand‐Binding Domain of the Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor

2003· review· en· W2154197432 on OpenAlexaff
August B. Smit, Katjuša Brejc, Naweed I. Syed, Titia K. Sixma

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNicotinic agonistCys-loop receptorsEpibatidineLigand-gated ion channelChemistryAcetylcholine receptorAlpha-4 beta-2 nicotinic receptorNicotinic acetylcholine receptorIon channelBiophysicsReceptorBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acetylcholine-binding protein (AChBP) is a novel protein with high similarity to the extracellular domain of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. AChBP lacks the transmembrane domains and intracellular loops typical for the nAChRs. AChBP is secreted from glia cells in the central nervous system of the freshwater snail, Lymnaea stagnalis, where it modulates synaptic transmission. AChBP forms homopentamers with pharmacology that resembles the alpha(7)-type of nicotinic receptors. As such, AChBP is a good model for the ligand-binding domain of the nAChRs. In the crystal structure of AChBP at 2.7 A, each protomer has a modified immunoglobulin fold. Almost all residues previously shown to be involved in ligand binding in the nicotinic receptor are found in a pocket at the subunit interface, which is lined with aromatic residues. The AChBP crystal structure explains many of the biochemical studies on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Surprisingly, the interface between protomers is relatively weakly conserved between families in the superfamily of pentameric ligand-gated ion channels. The lack of conservation has implications for the mechanism of gating of the ion channels.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations58
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207