MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153368468 · doi:10.1113/jp281339

Connexin 46 and connexin 50 gap junction channel properties are shaped by structural and dynamic features of their N‐terminal domains

2021· article· en· W3153368468 on OpenAlexafffund
Benny Yue, Bassam G. Haddad, Umair Khan, Honghong Chen, Mena Atalla, Ze Zhang, Daniel M. Zuckerman, Steve Reichow, Donglin Bai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnexins and lens biology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConnexinGap junctionGene isoformBiophysicsConnexonChemistryCell biologyBiologyIntracellularBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points Gap junctions formed by different connexins are expressed throughout the body and harbour unique channel properties that have not been fully defined mechanistically. Recent structural studies by cryo‐electron microscopy have produced high‐resolution models of the related but functionally distinct lens connexins (Cx50 and Cx46) captured in a stable open state, opening the door for structure–function comparison. Here, we conducted comparative molecular dynamics simulation and electrophysiology studies to dissect the isoform‐specific differences in Cx46 and Cx50 intercellular channel function. We show that key determinants Cx46 and Cx50 gap junction channel open stability and unitary conductance are shaped by structural and dynamic features of their N‐terminal domains, in particular the residue at the 9th position and differences in hydrophobic anchoring sites. The results of this study establish the open state Cx46/50 structural models as archetypes for structure–function studies targeted at elucidating the mechanism of gap junction channels and the molecular basis of disease‐causing variants. Abstract Connexins form intercellular communication channels, known as gap junctions (GJs), that facilitate diverse physiological roles, from long‐range electrical and chemical coupling to coordinating development and nutrient exchange. GJs formed by different connexin isoforms harbour unique channel properties that have not been fully defined mechanistically. Recent structural studies on Cx46 and Cx50 defined a novel and stable open state and implicated the amino‐terminal (NT) domain as a major contributor for isoform‐specific functional differences between these closely related lens connexins. To better understand these differences, we constructed models corresponding to wildtype Cx50 and Cx46 GJs, NT domain swapped chimeras, and point variants at the 9th residue for comparative molecular dynamics (MD) simulation and electrophysiology studies. All constructs formed functional GJ channels, except the chimeric Cx46‐50NT variant, which correlated with an introduced steric clash and increased dynamical behaviour (instability) of the NT domain observed by MD simulation. Single channel conductance correlated well with free‐energy landscapes predicted by MD, but resulted in a surprisingly greater degree of effect. Additionally, we observed significant effects on transjunctional voltage‐dependent gating ( V j gating) and/or open state dwell times induced by the designed NT domain variants. Together, these studies indicate intra‐ and inter‐subunit interactions involving both hydrophobic and charged residues within the NT domains of Cx46 and Cx50 play important roles in defining GJ open state stability and single channel conductance, and establish the open state Cx46/50 structural models as archetypes for structure–function studies targeted at elucidating GJ channel mechanisms and the molecular basis of cataract‐linked connexin variants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicConnexins and lens biologyFrench-language works237,207