↓ Skip to main content

Modulation of human Nav1.7 channel gating by synthetic α-scorpion toxin OD1 and its analogs

Overview of attention for article published in Channels, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Modulation of human Nav1.7 channel gating by synthetic α-scorpion toxin OD1 and its analogs
Published in
Channels, January 2016
DOI 10.1080/19336950.2015.1120392
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonid Motin, Thomas Durek, David J. Adams

Abstract

Nine different voltage-gated sodium channel isoforms are responsible for inducing and propagating action potentials in the mammalian nervous system. The Nav1.7 channel isoform plays an important role in conducting nociceptive signals. Specific mutations of this isoform may impair gating behaviour of the channel resulting in several pain syndromes. In addition to channel mutations, similar or opposite changes in gating may be produced by spider and scorpion toxins binding to different parts of the voltage-gated sodium channel. In the present study, we analyzed the effects of the α-scorpion toxin OD1 and two synthetic toxin analogues on the gating properties of the Nav1.7 sodium channel. All toxins potently inhibited channel inactivation, however, both toxin analogues showed substantially increased potency by more than one order of magnitude when compared with that of wild-type OD1. The decay phase of the whole-cell Na(+) current was substantially slower in the presence of toxins than in their absence. Single-channel recordings in the presence of the toxins revealed that Na(+) current inactivation slowed due to prolonged flickering of the channel between open and closed states. Our findings support the voltage-sensor trapping model of α-scorpion toxin action, in which the toxin prevents a conformational change in the domain IV voltage sensor that normally leads to fast channel inactivation.

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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 12%
Neuroscience 2 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 35%
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 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,432,465
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Channels
#277
of 386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,095
of 396,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Channels
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 386 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 396,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.