MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Role of the central region of the third intracellular loop of human D1‐class dopaminergic receptors

2013· article· en· W3168535221 on OpenAlexafffund
Awatif B. Albaker, Andrew Charette, Binhui Liang, Xiaodi Yang, Mario Tiberi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKing Saud UniversityOntario Mental Health Foundation
KeywordsAgonistG protein-coupled receptorReceptorDopaminergicIntracellularBiologyCell biologyNeuroscienceBiochemistryDopamine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dopamine D1‐class receptors (D1, D5) are G‐protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) that mediate important physiological effects in the brain and periphery. The alpha‐helical amino and carboxyl ends of the third intracellular loop (IL3) of GPCRs respectively adjacent to transmembrane regions 5 (TM5) and 6 (TM6) play a pivotal role in receptor activation and coupling to G proteins. Meanwhile, it remains unclear whether the central region of IL3 linking the cytoplasmic extension of TM5 and TM6 significantly contribute to GPCR activation and G protein coupling. Here, we address this issue using deletions of either the conserved N‐terminal moiety or divergent C‐terminal moiety of the central region of IL3 of human D1‐class receptors (D1ΔN and D5ΔN; D1ΔC and D5ΔC). Agonist affinities were significantly increased and reduced at D1ΔN and D5ΔN, respectively. However, D1ΔC and D5ΔC displayed drastically increased agonist affinity. We also observed full abolition of constitutive activity of D1ΔN and D5ΔN, and a severe blunting in agonist‐induced cAMP formation. In Contrast, constitutive and agonist‐dependent activity of D1ΔC and D5ΔC were considerably increased. Overall, our study strongly suggests a critical role of the central region of IL3 in subtype‐specific activation of D1‐class dopaminergic signaling. Potentially, this may be achieved through distinct motifs located in the N‐ and C‐terminal moiety of the central region of IL3. This work is supported by a Graduate Scholarship from King Saud University (to AB) and OMHF grant (to MT).

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling→French-language works237,207→