Adenosine does not vasodilate skeletal muscle arterioles via secondary nitric oxide or prostaglandin production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have recently shown that ADO is responsible for arteriolar vasodilation in response to skeletal muscle contraction. To determine whether the arteriolar vasodilation induced by adenosine (ADO) is, in part, due to the production of nitric oxide and prostaglandins we stimulated transverse arterioles (approx. 40μm) in a hamster cremaster preparation with a range of concentrations of ADO (10 −7 –10 −5 M) and measured the diameter of arterioles in the absence of and in the presence of cyclooxygenase inhibitor indomethacin (10 −6 M INDO), or nitric oxide synthase inhibitor L‐NAME (10 −6 M), or both. We further investigated whether there was an inhibition of ADO dilation in the presence of L‐NAME and nitric oxide donor SNAP (10 −7 M). We observed significant vasodilation at all concentrations of ADO (change in diameter with 10 −7 M ADO:4.8±1.0μm, 10 −6 M: 11.5±1.5μm, 5×10 −6 M:18.9±1.7μm, 10 −7 M: 22.0±1.5μm) that were not significantly inhibited by INDO or L‐NAME, or INDO plus L‐NAME. Further, supplementation of the L‐NAME inhibition with SNAP did not alter any vasodilation induced by ADO. These findings show that ADO does not cause vasodilation through the production of nitric oxide or prostaglandins. These data indicate that the ADO involved in arteriolar vasodilation in response to muscle contraction is not responsible for producing secondary vasodilators such and nitric oxide or prostaglandins.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".