Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37370119›Full record

ArticleBMC biology2023

A potential cost of evolving epibatidine resistance in poison frogs.

Julia M York, Cecilia M Borghese, Andrew A George, David C Cannatella, Harold H Zakon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julia M YorkDepartment of Neuroscience, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Cecilia M BorgheseDepartment of Neuroscience, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Andrew A George *Department of Neurobiology, The Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
David C Cannatella *Department of Integrative Biology, and Biodiversity Center, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
Harold H Zakon *Department of Neuroscience, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA. h.zakon@austin.utexas.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3700-4668
The University of Texas at Austin · USBarrow Neurological Institute · US

Funding

Characterization of amyloid-β:α7β2-nicotinic acetylcholine receptor interactions relevant to Alzheimer's diseaseR21AG067029 · NIA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI GEORGE, ANDREW ANTHONY, LUKAS, RONALD JOHN · 2020 to 2021
$423k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG067029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome dendrobatid poison frogs sequester the toxin epibatidine as a defense against predators. We previously identified an amino acid substitution (S108C) at a highly conserved site in a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor β2 subunit of dendrobatid frogs that decreases sensitivity to epibatidine in the brain-expressing α4β2 receptor. Introduction of S108C to the orthologous high-sensitivity human receptor similarly decreased sensitivity to epibatidine but also decreased sensitivity to acetylcholine, a potential cost if this were to occur in dendrobatids. This decrease in the acetylcholine sensitivity manifested as a biphasic acetylcholine concentration-response curve consistent with the addition of low-sensitivity receptors. Surprisingly, the addition of the β2 S108C into the α4β2 receptor of the dendrobatid Epipedobates anthonyi did not change acetylcholine sensitivity, appearing cost-free. We proposed that toxin-bearing dendrobatids may have additional amino acid substitutions protecting their receptors from alterations in acetylcholine sensitivity. To test this, in the current study, we compared the dendrobatid receptor to its homologs from two non-dendrobatid frogs.

resultsThe introduction of S108C into the α4β2 receptors of two non-dendrobatid frogs also does not affect acetylcholine sensitivity suggesting no additional dendrobatid-specific substitutions. However, S108C decreased the magnitude of neurotransmitter-induced currents in Epipedobates and the non-dendrobatid frogs. We confirmed that decreased current resulted from fewer receptors in the plasma membrane in Epipedobates using radiolabeled antibodies against the receptors. To test whether S108C alteration of acetylcholine sensitivity in the human receptor was due to (1) adding low-sensitivity binding sites by changing stoichiometry or (2) converting existing high- to low-sensitivity binding sites with no stoichiometric alteration, we made concatenated α4β2 receptors in stoichiometry with only high-sensitivity sites. S108C substitutions decreased maximal current and number of immunolabeled receptors but no longer altered acetylcholine sensitivity.

conclusionsThe most parsimonious explanation of our current and previous work is that the S108C substitution renders the β2 subunit less efficient in assembling/trafficking, thereby decreasing the number of receptors in the plasma membrane. Thus, while β2 S108C protects dendrobatids against sequestered epibatidine, it incurs a potential physiological cost of disrupted α4β2 receptor function.

Indexed as

AcetylcholinePoisonsBridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicHumansPyridinesAcetylcholineBridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicepibatidinePoisonsPyridinesEpibatidineEpipedobates anthonyiEvolutionNanorana parkeriNicotinic acetylcholine receptorPoison frogXenopus tropicalis

Identifiers

PMID37370119
PMCPMC10303791
OpenAlexW4382196335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.