MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552704709 · doi:10.3389/fnmol.2016.00120

Structural and Functional Consequences of Connexin 36 (Cx36) Interaction with Calmodulin

2016· article· en· W2552704709 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Siu, Ekaterina Smirnova, Cherie A. Brown, Christiane Zoidl, David C. Spray, Logan W. Donaldson, Georg Zoidl

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Molecular Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnexins and lens biology
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCalmodulinConnexinGap junctionContext (archaeology)Electrical SynapsesBiophysicsCalciumCalcium-binding proteinNeuroscienceBinding siteChemistryPhysicsBiologyCell biologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional plasticity of neuronal gap junctions involves the interaction of the neuronal connexin36 with calcium/calmodulin-dependent kinase II. The important relationship between Cx36 and CaMKII must also be considered in the context of another protein partner, Ca2+ loaded calmodulin, binding an overlapping site in the carboxy-terminus of Cx36. We demonstrate that CaM and CaMKII binding to Cx36 is calcium-dependent, but independent of each other, with Cx36 engaging with CaM before it reaches the gap junction plaque. Furthermore, Ca2+ loaded calmodulin activates Cx36 channels, which is unique for connexins. The NMR solution structure demonstrates that CaM binds Cx36 in its characteristic compact state with major hydrophobic contributions arising from W277 at anchor position 1 and V285 at position 8 of Cx36. Our results establish Cx36 as a hub binding Ca2+ loaded CaM and they identify this interaction as a critical step with implications for functions preceding the initiation of CaMKII mediated plasticity at electrical synapses.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Molecular NeuroscienceSame topicConnexins and lens biologyFrench-language works237,207