Biology

You would add selective antagonists to each of the suspected receptors and see which antagonist blocked the response of the endogenous ligand.

>>7664651
Did you get that from Yahoo? Just wondering if two different sources are saying the same thing or if it's only one source being repeated?

File: 1445674376862.jpg (86KB, 469x746px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 469x746px

>biology

>>7664517
If agonist A and antagonist Z is administered and onlt these two substances, and the effects of A are inhibited, you can be certain that a specific receptor was blocked. Do this for agonist B and antagonist Y until your stack of agonists and antagonists is depleted. result is full database of given receptor types.

Was that so hard? Im a psy student and i could figure it out easily. You, a bio student took the trouble to the question post on an internet baord. let that sink in.

File: one-erection.jpg (72KB, 380x540px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 380x540px

>>7665072
>engineering

>>7665096
>psych students thinking they sup
>GPA

>>7665096
Honestly I still don't get it. I understand it, but let's say agonist A causes X effect, and administration of antagonist Z prevents X effect and therefore prevents agonist A from binding to its receptor. So we know antagonist Z binds to the receptor that agonist A binds to, but how does that tell us on what effector the receptor is located? I honestly think i just don't understand the question at all or something.

>>7665271
I mean, if we know what receptor agonist A binds to, yeah I get it, but that doesn't tell us where in the body or on what structure those particular receptors are located?

>>7664517


This is bullshit. Asking homework questions on /sci/ is against the rules. I got a 2 day ban for this. MODS!

>>7665072
just say you don't understand what physiology, agonists, antagonists are, it's ok to be stupid

>>7664830

See, I got the answer from Yahoo cause you got the question from Yahoo.

My answer would be to radioactive labeling of the different compounds that can act as agonists or antagonists and see which ones bind to the transmitters. That way you can determine where the transmitters are and what they are.

>>7664517
>>7667640
While the yahoo answer suffices, I dont know how much detail you are required to go into.

In a lab setting, they would most likely use a FRET = Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer. Basically you take 2 proteins (that you think interact. In this case if you use an agonist for epinephrine binding to beta-adrenergic receptor, then you will see the the receptor go through a conformation change and dissociate from its trimeric G-protein. Then the trimeric G-protein will associate with Adenylyl cyclase (AC). So you would use the FRET on say the receptor + the trimeric G protein or maybe the trimeric G-protein and AC.
How the FRET works is that you excite the first protein you have the FP bound to which will emit in a certain color (usually green but you get to pick), This color will only emit when the protein is dissociated from the other protein as it will only emit a certain wavelength.
If the protein is associated with the other FP, then it will emit another color (Red) - because you excite at a certain frequency and the 2nd protein is made so that when the first protein is excited and emits a wavelength, the second protein absorbs that wavelength and emits its own of a different color (the 2nd one absorbs the green and emits red).
Anyways, this allows you to see the signal activation clearly.

In the case of epinephrine, say you setup a FRET with the trimeric G-proteins and AC. If there is association that looks like a bell curve. Then that is the epinephrine agonist working. If there is no association and it is just a flat graph, then there is the antagonist.

It would essentially look like this graph. With the upward trend being the point where you added the agonist. And then the peak being where you removed the agonist.

If it were an antagonist then nothing would happen and would see a flat line (because the trimeric G-protein never dissociates from the receptor and binds with AC).

>>7667799

Oh yeah, fluorescence markers work better than what I said lol, but it's basically the same idea.

>>7667799
This is what I was thinking the question was asking, so I wasn't sure what the prof wanted. After talking to him, he pretty much wanted a basic answer like: if agonist A has an effect, inhibit it with antagonist A; if effect goes away, you know the receptor is the type you were testing for. I appreciate the response, it gave me an idea of how I could have tackled the question which is why I made the post. I wasn't sure how he wanted the question answered. Also fuck off to all the people who think I don't know what agonists and antagonists do.

File: doge4.jpg (96KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 960x720px

>>7669172
Psych student was right after all. Hahaha.