Augenirritation und Augenverätzungen

Schrage, Norbert

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-54444-6_28

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…S6C), the surface-accessible volume of the orthosteric binding pocket in M1R is significantly larger than that of the M2R, with 73.7 A 3 in the M1R and 55.0 A 3 in the M2R [calculated by CASTp server ( 26)] (table S2). This might contribute to the lower affinity of iperoxo for M1R as compared to M2R (25). In addition, our M1R construct has an ICL3 truncation and an unintentional N110Q mutation, but these modifications do not affect the binding affinity of iperoxo (table S3).…”

Section: Comparison Of the Iperoxo Binding Pocket In M1r And M2rmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structures of the M1 and M2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor/G-protein complexes

Maeda

Robertson

et al. 2019

Science

280

308

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors are G protein–coupled receptors that respond to acetylcholine and play important signaling roles in the nervous system. There are five muscarinic receptor subtypes (M1R to M5R), which, despite sharing a high degree of sequence identity in the transmembrane region, couple to different heterotrimeric GTP-binding proteins (G proteins) to transmit signals. M1R, M3R, and M5R couple to the Gq/11 family, whereas M2R and M4R couple to the Gi/o family. Here, we present and compare the cryo–electron microscopy structures of M1R in complex with G11 and M2R in complex with GoA. The M1R-G11 complex exhibits distinct features, including an extended transmembrane helix 5 and carboxyl-terminal receptor tail that interacts with G protein. Detailed analysis of these structures provides a framework for understanding the molecular determinants of G-protein coupling selectivity.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of the Iperoxo Binding Pocket In M1r And M2rmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though iperoxo is a highly efficacious agonist for both M1R and M2R, its affinity for M2R is 10-to 100-fold higher than for M1R, depending on how it is measured (25). Although the amino acids that form the iperoxo binding pocket are well resolved in the M1R cryo-EM map ( fig.…”

Section: Comparison Of the Iperoxo Binding Pocket In M1r And M2rmentioning

confidence: 99%