Control of CCR5 Cell-Surface Targeting by the PRAF2 Gatekeeper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cell-surface targeting of neo-synthesized G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) involves the recruitment of receptors into COPII vesicles budding at endoplasmic reticulum exit sites (ERESs). This process is regulated for some GPCRs by escort proteins, which facilitate their export, or by gatekeepers that retain the receptors in the ER. PRAF2, an ER-resident four trans- membrane domain protein with cytoplasmic extremities, operates as a gatekeeper for the GB1 protomer of the heterodimeric GABAB receptor, interacting with a tandem di-leucine/RXR retention motif in the carboxyterminal tail of GB1. PRAF2 was also reported to interact in a two-hybrid screen with a peptide corresponding to the carboxyterminal tail of the chemokine receptor CCR5 despite the absence of RXR motifs in its sequence. Using a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based subcellular localization system, we found that PRAF2 inhibits, in a concentration-dependent manner, the plasma membrane export of CCR5. BRET-based proximity assays and Co-IP experiments demonstrated that PRAF2/CCR5 interaction does not require the presence of a receptor carboxyterminal tail and involves instead the transmembrane domains of both proteins. The mutation of the potential di-leucine/RXR motif contained in the third intracellular loop of CCR5 does not affect PRAF2-mediated retention. It instead impairs the cell-surface export of CCR5 by inhibiting CCR5’s interaction with its private escort protein, CD4. PRAF2 and CD4 thus display opposite roles on the cell-surface export of CCR5, with PRAF2 inhibiting and CD4 promoting this process, likely operating at the level of CCR5 recruitment into COPII vesicles, which leave the ER.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".