Binding Properties of the Transforming Growth Factor-β Coreceptor Betaglycan: Proposed Mechanism for Potentiation of Receptor Complex Assembly and Signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transforming growth factor (TGF) β1, β2, and β3 (TGF-β1-TGF-β3, respectively) are small secreted signaling proteins that each signal through the TGF-β type I and type II receptors (TβRI and TβRII, respectively). However, TGF-β2, which is well-known to bind TβRII several hundred-fold more weakly than TGF-β1 and TGF-β3, has an additional requirement for betaglycan, a membrane-anchored nonsignaling receptor. Betaglycan has two domains that bind TGF-β2 at independent sites, but how it binds TGF-β2 to potentiate TβRII binding and how the complex with TGF-β, TβRII, and betaglycan undergoes the transition to the signaling complex with TGF-β, TβRII, and TβRI are not understood. To investigate the mechanism, the binding of the TGF-βs to the betaglycan extracellular domain, as well as its two independent binding domains, either directly or in combination with the TβRI and TβRII ectodomains, was studied using surface plasmon resonance, isothermal titration calorimetry, and size-exclusion chromatography. These studies show that betaglycan binds TGF-β homodimers with a 1:1 stoichiometry in a manner that allows one molecule of TβRII to bind. These studies further show that betaglycan modestly potentiates the binding of TβRII and must be displaced to allow TβRI to bind. These findings suggest that betaglycan functions to bind and concentrate TGF-β2 on the cell surface and thus promote the binding of TβRII by both membrane-localization effects and allostery. These studies further suggest that the transition to the signaling complex is mediated by the recruitment of TβRI, which simultaneously displaces betaglycan and stabilizes the bound TβRII by direct receptor-receptor contact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".