Gating transitions in the selectivity filter region of a sodium channel are coupled to the domain IV voltage sensor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Voltage-dependent ion channels are crucial for generation and propagation of electrical activity in biological systems. The primary mechanism for voltage transduction in these proteins involves the movement of a voltage-sensing domain (D), which opens a gate located on the cytoplasmic side. A distinct conformational change in the selectivity filter near the extracellular side has been implicated in slow inactivation gating, which is important for spike frequency adaptation in neural circuits. However, it remains an open question whether gating transitions in the selectivity filter region are also actuated by voltage sensors. Here, we examine conformational coupling between each of the four voltage sensors and the outer pore of a eukaryotic voltage-dependent sodium channel. The voltage sensors of these sodium channels are not structurally symmetric and exhibit functional specialization. To track the conformational rearrangements of individual voltage-sensing domains, we recorded domain-specific gating pore currents. Our data show that, of the four voltage sensors, only the domain IV voltage sensor is coupled to the conformation of the selectivity filter region of the sodium channel. Trapping the outer pore in a particular conformation with a high-affinity toxin or disulphide crossbridge impedes the return of this voltage sensor to its resting conformation. Our findings directly establish that, in addition to the canonical electromechanical coupling between voltage sensor and inner pore gates of a sodium channel, gating transitions in the selectivity filter region are also coupled to the movement of a voltage sensor. Furthermore, our results also imply that the voltage sensor of domain IV is unique in this linkage and in the ability to initiate slow inactivation in sodium channels.
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".