↓ Skip to main content

Probing Proline Residues in the Prokaryotic Ligand-Gated Ion Channel, ELIC

Overview of attention for article published in Biochemistry, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Probing Proline Residues in the Prokaryotic Ligand-Gated Ion Channel, ELIC
Published in
Biochemistry, June 2018
DOI 10.1021/acs.biochem.8b00379
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Mosesso, Dennis A. Dougherty, Sarah C. R. Lummis

Abstract

Erwinia ligand-gated ion channel (ELIC) is a bacterial homologue of vertebrate pentameric ligand-gated ion channels (pLGICs) and has proven to be a valuable model for understanding the structure and function of this important protein family. There is nevertheless still a question about whether molecular details can be accurately extrapolated from this protein to those found in eukaryotes. Here we explore the role of proline residues (Pros) in ELIC by creating mutant receptors, expressing them in Xenopus laevis oocytes, and using whole-cell voltage-clamp electrophysiology to monitor channel activity. In contrast to eukaryotic pLGICs, proline-to-alanine (Pro-to-Ala) substitution in ELIC mostly resulted in gain of function, and even altering highly conserved Pro residues in M1 and the M2-M3 loop did not ablate function. These substitutions also mostly resulted in ablation of the modulation by Ca2+ observed in wild-type receptors. Substitution of the Pro in the "Cys loop", however, did result in nonfunctional receptors. Probing this residue with noncanonical amino acids revealed a requirement for a substituted amine at this position, as well as a general preference for Pro analogues with greater intrinsic cis biases. We propose there is likely a cis bond at the apex of the Cys loop in this protein, which is consistent with some, but not all, findings from other pLGICs. Overall, the data show that the roles of proline residues are less critical in ELIC than in other pLGICs, supporting other studies that suggest caution must be applied in using data from this prokaryotic receptor to understand molecular details of eukaryotic pLGIC receptor function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 33%
Chemistry 4 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,854,405
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from Biochemistry
#20,715
of 22,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,000
of 332,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochemistry
#94
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,293 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.