Identification of RGS4 structures involved in its plasma membrane localization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RGS4 is highly expressed in the sinoatrial node of the heart and plays an important role in the regulation of M2R‐mediated heart rate control. In order understand the intracellular mechanisms that may regulate RGS4 function in the heart and other tissues we set out to identify the key determinants of RGS4 function in cell culture models. Previous studies have shown that optimal function of R4 group proteins requires their efficient plasma membrane targeting. Based on their high degree of similarity, we set out to compare the localization and function of RGS4 and RGS5 in mammalian cells. Confocal microscopy shows that RGS4‐YFP is mainly localized to the plasma membrane of HEK cells whereas RGS5‐YFP, as reported previously, is found primarily in the cytosol. Comparison of the sequence differences between RGS4 and RGS4 has identified several regions in RGS4 that may promote its increased localization to the plasma membrane. Chimeric YFP‐tagged cDNA constructs for RGS4:RGS5 and RGS5:RGS4 indicate that critical residues in the carboxyl‐terminal domain of RGS4 (including the RGS box) may promote its specific targeting to the plasma membrane but that G‐protein binding is not required for this function. Current studies are aimed at defining the specific residues within the carboxyl terminal that promote its increased localization and function. This study was funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario Grant‐in‐Aid Program grants T6799
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".