Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16735755›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of general physiology2006

Block of muscle nicotinic receptors by choline suggests that the activation and desensitization gates act as distinct molecular entities.

Yamini Purohit, Claudio Grosman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of general physiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Novel and Functionally Diverse Class of Acetylcholine-Gated Ion Channels.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. A Missense Mutation A384P Associated with Human Hyperekplexia Reveals a Desensitization Site of Glycine Receptors.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yamini PurohitDepartment of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology, and Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, 61801, USA.
Claudio Grosman
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

Mechanisms of Neurotransmitter-Gated Ion ChannelsR01NS042169 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA-CHAMPAIGN · PI GROSMAN, CLAUDIO F · 2003 to 2022
$6.6M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS042169
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ion channel block in muscle acetylcholine nicotinic receptors (AChRs) is an extensively reported phenomenon. Yet, the mechanisms underlying the interruption of ion flow or the interaction of the blocker with the channel's gates remain incompletely characterized. In this paper, we studied fast channel block by choline, a quaternary-ammonium cation that is also an endogenous weak agonist of this receptor, and a valuable tool in structure-function studies. Analysis of the single-channel current amplitude as a function of both choline concentration and voltage revealed that extracellular choline binds to the open-channel pore with millimolar apparent affinity (K(B) congruent with 12 mM in the presence of approximately 155 mM monovalent and 3.5 mM divalent, inorganic cations), and that it permeates the channel faster than acetylcholine. This, together with its relatively small size ( approximately 5.5 A along its longest axis), suggests that the pore-blocking choline binding site is the selectivity filter itself, and that current blockages simply reflect the longer-lived sojourns of choline at this site. Kinetic analysis of single-channel traces indicated that increasing occupancy of the pore-blocking site by choline (as judged from the reduction of the single-channel current amplitude) is accompanied by the lengthening of (apparent) open interval durations. Consideration of a number of possible mechanisms firmly suggests that this prolongation results from the local effect of choline interfering with the operation of the activation gate (closure of blocked receptors is slower than that of unblocked receptors by a factor of approximately 13), whereas closure of the desensitization gate remains unaffected. Thus, we suggest that these two gates act as distinct molecular entities. Also, the detailed understanding gained here on how choline distorts the observed open-time durations can be used to compensate for this artifact during activation assays. This correction is necessary if we are to understand how choline binds to and gates the AChR.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell LineCholineDose-Response Relationship, DrugIon Channel GatingMiceMuscle, SkeletalNicotinic AntagonistsReceptors, NicotinicCholineNicotinic AntagonistsReceptors, Nicotinic

Identifiers

PMID16735755
PMCPMC2151541
OpenAlexW2157783511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.