117,406 research outputs found
Different internalization properties of the alpha1a and alpha1b-adrenergic receptor subytpes: the potential role of receptor interaction with beta-arrestins and AP50
Direct interaction of ezrin with the alpha1b-adrenergic receptor regulates recycling of the internalized receptors
Anchoring of both PKA and 14-3-3 inhibits the Rho-GEF activity of the AKAP-Lbc signaling complex
nverse agonism and neutral antagonism at alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-adrenergic receptor subtypes
We have characterized the pharmacological antagonism, i.e., neutral antagonism or inverse agonism, displayed by a number of alpha-blockers at two alpha1-adrenergic receptor (AR) subtypes, alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR. Constitutively activating mutations were introduced into the alpha(1a)-AR at the position homologous to A293 of the alpha(1b)-AR where activating mutations were previously described. Twenty-four alpha-blockers differing in their chemical structures were initially tested for their effect on the agonist-independent inositol phosphate response mediated by the constitutively active A271E and A293E mutants expressed in COS-7 cells. A selected number of drugs also were tested for their effect on the small, but measurable spontaneous activity of the wild-type alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR expressed in COS-7 cells. The results of our study demonstrate that a large number of structurally different alpha-blockers display profound negative efficacy at both the alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR subtypes. For other drugs, the negative efficacy varied at the different constitutively active mutants. The most striking difference concerns a group of N-arylpiperazines, including 8-[2-[4-(5-chloro-2-methoxyphenyl)-1-piperazinyl]ethyl]-8-azaspiro [4, 5] decane-7,9-dione (REC 15/3039), REC 15/2739, and REC 15/3011, which are inverse agonists with profound negative efficacy at the wild-type alpha(1b)-AR, but not at the alpha(1a)-AR
Inverse agonism and neutral antagonism at the alpha1a and alpha1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes
Co- and Post-translational modifications of the alpha1b-adrenergic receptor: effects on receptor expression and function
Mutagenesis and modelling of the alpha1b-adrenergic receptor highlights the role of the helix3/helix 6 interface in receptor activation
The adaptor complex 2 directly interacts with the alpha1b-adrenergic receptor and plays a role in receptor endocyosis
Mutagenesis and modelling of the alpha(1b)-adrenergic receptor highlight the role of the helix 3/helix 6 interface in receptor activation
Computer simulations on a new model of the alpha1b-adrenergic receptor based on the crystal structure of rhodopsin have been combined with experimental mutagenesis to investigate the role of residues in the cytosolic half of helix 6 in receptor activation. Our results support the hypothesis that a salt bridge between the highly conserved arginine (R143(3.50)) of the E/DRY motif of helix 3 and a conserved glutamate (E289(6.30)) on helix 6 constrains the alpha1b-AR in the inactive state. In fact, mutations of E289(6.30) that weakened the R143(3.50)-E289(6.30) interaction constitutively activated the receptor. The functional effect of mutating other amino acids on helix 6 (F286(6.27), A292(6.33), L296(6.37), V299(6.40,) V300(6.41), and F303(6.44)) correlates with the extent of their interaction with helix 3 and in particular with R143(3.50) of the E/DRY sequence
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
