Coevolutionary signals in metabotropic glutamate receptors capture residue contacts and long-range functional interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upon ligand binding to a G protein-coupled receptor, extracellular signals are transmitted into a cell through sets of residue interactions that translate ligand binding into structural rearrangements. These interactions needed for functions impose evolutionary constraints so that, on occasion, mutations in one position may be compensated by other mutations at functionally coupled positions. To quantify the impact of amino acid substitutions in the context of major evolutionary divergence in the G protein-coupled receptor subfamily of metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs), we combined two phylogenetic-based algorithms, Evolutionary Trace and covariation Evolutionary Trace, to infer potential structure-function couplings and roles in mGluRs. We found a subset of evolutionarily important residues at known functional sites and evidence of coupling among distinct structural clusters in mGluR. In addition, experimental mutagenesis and functional assays confirmed that some highly covariant residues are coupled, revealing their synergy. Collectively, these findings inform a critical step toward understanding the molecular and structural basis of amino acid variation patterns within mGluRs and provide insight for drug development, protein engineering, and analysis of naturally occurring 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".