Distinct Structural Pathways Coordinate the Activation of AMPA Receptor-Auxiliary Subunit Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurotransmitter-gated ion channels adopt different gating modes to fine-tune signaling at central synapses. At glutamatergic synapses, high and low activity of AMPA receptors (AMPARs) is observed when pore-forming subunits coassemble with or without auxiliary subunits, respectively. Whether a common structural pathway accounts for these different gating modes is unclear. Here, we identify two structural motifs that determine the time course of AMPAR channel activation. A network of electrostatic interactions at the apex of the AMPAR ligand-binding domain (LBD) is essential for gating by pore-forming subunits, whereas a conserved motif on the lower, D2 lobe of the LBD prolongs channel activity when auxiliary subunits are present. Accordingly, channel activity is almost entirely abolished by elimination of the electrostatic network but restored via auxiliary protein interactions at the D2 lobe. In summary, we propose that activation of native AMPAR complexes is coordinated by distinct structural pathways, favored by the association/dissociation of auxiliary subunits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".