Delineation of the conserved functional properties of D<sub>1A</sub>, D<sub>1B</sub> and D<sub>1C</sub> dopamine receptor subtypes in vertebrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summry— The three main subtypes of dopamine D1 receptor (D1A, D1B and D1C) subtypes found in most vertebrate groups were generated by two major steps of gene duplications, early in evolution. To identify the functional characteristics contributing to conservation of these paralogous D1 receptors in vertebrates, the pharmacological and functional properties of fish (Anguilla anguilla), amphibian (Xenopus lævis) and human receptors were systematically analysed in transfected cells. The ligand‐binding parameters appeared essentially similar for orthologous receptors, but differed significantly among the subtypes. The D1A receptors from the three species displayed low intrinsic activity and a fast rate of agonist‐induced desensitization. All the orthologous D1B receptors exhibited a similar desensitization time‐course, but with smaller amplitude of decrease than D1A receptors, in agreement with their higher basal activity. In contrast, D1C receptors, which do not exist in mammals, have low intrinsic activity and exhibit only weak, but rapid, agonist‐induced desensitization, without any changes upon longer treatment with agonist. Thus, each of the three D1 receptor subtypes are characterized by activation and desensitization properties, in a sequence‐specific manner, which has been probably acquired early after gene duplications, and constrained their conservation during vertebrate evolution. These properties have been instrumental to adapt dopamine system to the physiology of the numerous neuronal networks and functions they control in the large and complex brains of vertebrates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".