ArticlePflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology2015
The differential contribution of GluN1 and GluN2 to the gating operation of the NMDA receptor channel.
Article in Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- NMDA receptors in neurodegenerative diseases: mechanisms and emerging therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Review
- Gut-brain axis and vascular dementia: a review on mechanisms and Chinese herbal medicine therapeutics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Article
- Role of NMDA Receptor in High-Pressure Neurological Syndrome and Hyperbaric Oxygen Toxicity.Biomolecules · 2023Review
- Short-term postsynaptic plasticity facilitates predictive tracking in continuous attractors.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2023Article
- Cadmium activates AMPA and NMDA receptors with M3 helix cysteine substitutions.The Journal of general physiology · 2020Article
- The Mechanism of NMDA Receptor Hyperexcitation in High Pressure Helium and Hyperbaric Oxygen.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- The effect of high pressure on the NMDA receptor: molecular dynamics simulations.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Impaired Cognitive Function and Altered Hippocampal Synaptic Plasticity in Mice Lacking Dermatan Sulfotransferase Chst14/D4st1.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2019Article
- Modulation of NMDA channel gating by CaScientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Ν-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor channel is an obligatory heterotetramer formed by two GluN1 and two GluN2 subunits. However, the differential contribution of the two different subunits to channel operation is not clear. We found that the apparent affinity of glycine to GluN1 (K gly ∼ 0.6 μM) is much higher than NMDA or glutamate to GluN2 (K NMDA ∼ 36 μM, K glu ∼ 4.8 μM). The binding rate constant (derived from the linear regression of the apparent macroscopic binding rates) of glycine to GluN1 (∼9.8 × 10(6) M(-1) s(-1)), however, is only slightly faster than NMDA to GluN2 (∼4.1 × 10(6) M(-1) s(-1)). Accordingly, the apparent unbinding rates of glycine from activated GluN1 (time constant ∼2 s) are much slower than NMDA from activated GluN2 (time constant ∼70 ms). Moreover, the decay of NMDA currents upon wash-off of both glycine and NMDA seems to follow the course of NMDA rather than glycine unbinding. But if only glycine is washed off, the current decay is much slower, apparently following the course of glycine unbinding. The apparent binding rate of glycine to the fully deactivated channel, in the absence of NMDA, is roughly the same as that measured with co-application of both ligands, whereas the apparent binding rate of NMDA to the fully deactivated channel in the absence of glycine is markedly slower. In this regard, it is interesting that the seventh residue in the highly conserved SYTANLAAF motif (A7) in GluN1 and GluN2 are so close that they may interact with each other to control the dimension of the external pore mouth. Moreover, specific mutations involving A7 in GluN1 but not in GluN2 result in channels showing markedly enhanced affinity to both glycine and NMDA and readily activated by only NMDA, as if the channel is already partially activated. We conclude that GluN2 is most likely directly responsible for the activation gate of the NMDA channel, whereas GluN1 assumes a role of more global control, especially on the gating conformational changes in GluN2. Structurally, this intersubunit regulatory interaction seems to involve the SYTANLAAF motif, especially the A7 residue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.