Identification and characterization of hydrophobic gate residues in TRP channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transient receptor potential (TRP) channels, subdivided into 6 subfamilies in mammals, have essential roles in sensory physiology. They respond to remarkably diverse stimuli, comprising thermal, chemical, and mechanical modalities, through opening or closing of channel gates. In this study, we systematically substituted the hydrophobic residues within the distal fragment of pore‐lining helix S6 with hydrophilic residues and, based on Xenopus oocyte and mammalian cell electrophysiology and a hydrophobic gate theory, identified hydrophobic gates in TRPV6/V5/V4/C4/ M8. We found that channel activity drastically increased when TRPV6 Ala616 or Met617 or TRPV5 Ala576 or Met577 , but not any of their adjacent residues, was substituted with hydrophilic residues. Channel activity strongly correlated with the hydrophilicity of the residues at those sites, suggesting that consecutive hydrophobic residues TRPV6 Ala616‐Met617 and TRPV5 Ala576‐Met577 form a double‐residue gate in each channel. By the same strategy, we identified a hydrophobic single‐residue gate in TRPV4 Iso715 , TRPC4 Iso617 , and TRPM8 Val976 . In support of the hydrophobic gate theory, hydrophilic substitution at the gate site, which removes the hydrophobic gate seal, substantially increased the activity of TRP channels in low‐activity states but had little effect on the function of activated channels. The double‐residue gate channels were more sensitive to small changes in the gate's hydrophobicity or size than single‐residue gate channels. The unconventional double‐reside gating mechanism in TRP channels may have been evolved to respond especially to physiologic stimuli that trigger relatively small gate conformational changes.—Zheng, W., Hu, R., Cai, R., Hofmann, L., Hu, Q., Fatehi, M., Long, W., Kong, T., Tang, J., Light, P., Flockerzi, V., Cao, Y., Chen, X.‐Z. Identification and characterization of hydrophobic gate residues in TRP channels. FASEB J. 32, 639–653 (2018). www.fasebj.org
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 | 0.000 | 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".