↓ Skip to main content

Antagonistic Effect of a Cytoplasmic Domain on the Basal Activity of Polymodal Potassium Channels

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 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
Antagonistic Effect of a Cytoplasmic Domain on the Basal Activity of Polymodal Potassium Channels
Published in
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnmol.2018.00301
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ismail Ben Soussia, Frank S. Choveau, Sandy Blin, Eun-Jin Kim, Sylvain Feliciangeli, Franck C. Chatelain, Dawon Kang, Delphine Bichet, Florian Lesage

Abstract

TREK/TRAAK channels are polymodal K+ channels that convert very diverse stimuli, including bioactive lipids, mechanical stretch and temperature, into electrical signals. The nature of the structural changes that regulate their activity remains an open question. Here, we show that a cytoplasmic domain (the proximal C-ter domain, pCt) exerts antagonistic effects in TREK1 and TRAAK. In basal conditions, pCt favors activity in TREK1 whereas it impairs TRAAK activity. Using the conformation-dependent binding of fluoxetine, we show that TREK1 and TRAAK conformations at rest are different, and under the influence of pCt. Finally, we show that depleting PIP2 in live cells has a more pronounced inhibitory effect on TREK1 than on TRAAK. This differential regulation of TREK1 and TRAAK is related to a previously unrecognized PIP2-binding site (R329, R330, and R331) present within TREK1 pCt, but not in TRAAK pCt. Collectively, these new data point out pCt as a major regulatory domain of these channels and suggest that the binding of PIP2 to the pCt of TREK1 results in the stabilization of the conductive conformation in basal conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 7 29%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 3 13%
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 21 September 2018.
All research outputs
#17,990,045
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#2,087
of 2,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,576
of 335,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#95
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 335,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.