MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Molecular comparison of WT and F92A Caveolin‐1: Direction towards increasing Nitric Oxide bioavailability

2010· article· en· W3167068202 on OpenAlexaff
Arpeeta Sharma, Carol Yu, Pascal Bernatchez

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnosCaveolaeCaveolin 1Nitric oxideChemistryCaveolinMutantBioavailabilityWild typeNitric Oxide Synthase Type IIIBiochemistryCell biologyNitric oxide synthaseEnzymeCellBiologyPharmacologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION Endothelial dysfunction is characterized by the loss of endothelial cell (EC)‐derived Nitric Oxide (NO) release and increased superoxide anion (O 2 − ). Endothelial NO synthase (eNOS) is the enzyme that synthesizes NO and O 2 − in physiological and pathological settings, respectively. Caveolin‐1 (Cav‐1) is the major coat protein of caveolae that binds to and inhibits eNOS NO release, and we have shown that Cav‐1 F92 is the amino acid that inhibits NO release (Bernatchez, PNAS 2005). Interestingly, our unpublished observations show that F92A Cav‐1 mutant can INCREASE NO release. OBJECTIVE To determine how F92A Cav‐1 increases NO release METHODS We performed a biochemical comparison of WT vs F92A Cav‐1 to determine if the F92A mutation affects its activity. We also looked at Cav‐1 F92A substitution on eNOS O 2 − release. RESULTS WT Cav‐1 (25kDa) targets to caveolae and oligomerizes into high MW homo‐oligomers (350–600 kDa). Interestingly, F92A Cav‐1 enrichment in caveolae and homo‐oligomers are identical to WT Cav‐1, and by GST pulldown assays we show that WT and F92A Cav‐1 bind identically to eNOS. However, we have observed that F92A Cav‐1 can decrease O 2 − release as compared to WT Cav‐1. CONCLUSION These data show that F92A Cav‐1 binds eNOS, prevents WT Cav‐1 inhibition of eNOS and decreases O 2 − release, and suggest that eNOS‐Cav‐1 interaction is a therapeutic target for improving NO bioavailability.

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 score0.008

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→