Altered physiology of acid secretion in depression‐prone Flinders rats results in exacerbated NSAID and stress‐induced gastric damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Flinders Sensitive Line (FSL) rats are characterized by hypersensitivity to cholinergic stimuli and have been extensively used for studying depressive disorders. A link between depression and peptic ulcers has long been established; however, there is a lack of data from animal models. METHODS: We studied the physiology of acid secretion in FSL and Flinders Resistant Line (FRL) rats in vivo and in vitro. We also examined the susceptibility of Flinders rats to water immersion restraint stress (WIRS) or NSAID-induced gastric damage and explored the effect of an anticholinergic agent, atropine, in reversing this effect. KEY RESULTS: Basal acid output was more than twofold greater in FSL compared with FRL rats in vivo, 213.5 and 92.8 μEq/3 h/100 g (P = 0.02), respectively. Carbachol was a more potent secretagog in vitro, and somatostatin was a less potent inhibitory agent, while paradoxically stimulating acid secretion over and above the carbachol response in gastric glands from FSL rats. The FSL rats were more susceptible to indomethacin and WIRS-induced gastric mucosal damage compared with FRL rats. Atropine reduced acid output, which resulted in a reduction in indomethacin and stress-induced gastric damage in FSL rats. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Our study, for the first time, demonstrates that the altered vagally mediated physiology of acid secretion in depression-prone FSL rats contributes to gastric hypersecretion and, consequently, results in exacerbated stress and NSAID-induced gastric damage. Flinders rats may be a useful animal model for studying acid-related and also gastrointestinal functional disorders in depression.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".