MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412184685 · doi:10.1080/19336950.2025.2529250

Inwardly rectifying potassium channels: Critical insights for insect species and Apis mellifera

2025· review· en· W4412184685 on OpenAlexaff
Fabien Sourisseau, Craig A. Doupnik, Pierre Charnet, Mohamed Chahine

Bibliographic record

VenueChannels · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPotassium channelInsectPotassiumBiologyInward-rectifier potassium ion channelIon channelChemistryBotanyBiophysicsGeneticsReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kir (inwardly rectifying potassium) channels that play key roles in maintaining potassium homeostasis, neuronal excitability, and osmoregulation have been cloned and characterized in a variety of insects. In Drosophila melanogaster, three Kir channels (dKir1 dKir2, and dKir3) have been cloned and characterized, and share significant homology with mammalian Kir channels. The dKir channels are essential for various developmental processes, such as wing patterning, by modulating bone morphogenetic protein signaling pathways. Electrophysiological studies have confirmed that Drosophila Kir channels function in a way analogous to their mammalian counterparts, indicating that their roles in cellular and developmental signaling have been evolutionarily conserved. Several Kir channels have also been identified and characterized in mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti and Anopheles gambiae). Interestingly, insect Kir channel orthologs cluster into three gene “clades” or subfamilies (Kir1, Kir2, Kir3) that are distinct from mammal Kir channels based on sequence comparisons. Insect Kir channel paralogs range from two to eight Kir channel genes per species genome representing separate gene duplication events. These differences may be attributed to distinct physiological adaptations associated with their respective taxonomic groups. The honeybee Apis mellifera genome contains two Kir channel genes, AmKir1 and AmKir2, producing six Kir channel isoforms via alternative splicing, which have been cloned and expressed in heterologous systems to study their electrophysiological properties. This review provides a comprehensive overview of current knowledge about Kir channel structures, activities, and gating as well as of their roles in insects, including evolutionary genomic aspects, molecular biology, physiological roles, and pharmacological targeting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChannelsSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207