4.8 Article

Topography and motion of acid-sensing ion channel intracellular domains

期刊

ELIFE
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELIFE SCIENCES PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.68955

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Institute of General Medical Sciences [R35GM137951]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ASICs are trimeric cation-selective channels activated by decreases in extracellular pH. The coarse topography of chicken ASIC1 intracellular domains was determined by fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET), showing the C terminal tail projecting into the cytosol by approximately 35 angstrom. No relative movement between the N and C tails upon extracellular acidification was detected, but axial motions of the membrane proximal segments toward the plasma membrane were observed.
Acid-sensing ion channels (ASICs) are trimeric cation-selective channels activated by decreases in extracellular pH. The intracellular N and C terminal tails of ASIC1 influence channel gating, trafficking, and signaling in ischemic cell death. Despite several X-ray and cryo-EM structures of the extracellular and transmembrane segments of ASIC1, these important intracellular tails remain unresolved. Here, we describe the coarse topography of the chicken ASIC1 intracellular domains determined by fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET), measured using either fluorescent lifetime imaging or patch clamp fluorometry. We find the C terminal tail projects into the cytosol by approximately 35 angstrom and that the N and C tails from the same subunits are closer than adjacent subunits. Using pH-insensitive fluorescent proteins, we fail to detect any relative movement between the N and C tails upon extracellular acidification but do observe axial motions of the membrane proximal segments toward the plasma membrane. Taken together, our study furnishes a coarse topographic map of the ASIC intracellular domains while providing directionality and context to intracellular conformational changes induced by extracellular acidification.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据