MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exercise training improves neuronal nitric oxide synthase mediated inhibition of sympathetic vasoconstriction (706.20)

2014· article· en· W1554456692 on OpenAlexaffabout
Darren S. DeLorey, Nicholas Jendzjowsky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCummings Foundation
KeywordsVasoconstrictionInternal medicineContraction (grammar)EndocrinologyMedicineNitric oxide synthaseStimulationVasodilationNitric oxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We hypothesized that exercise training (ET) would increase neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) mediated inhibition of sympathetic vasoconstriction in resting and contracting skeletal muscle. Sprague‐Dawley rats were randomly assigned to sedentary (S, n=8) or ET (n=10; 40m/min, 5° grade; 15 min/d, 5d/wk for 4 wks) groups. Rats were anesthetised and instrumented for lumbar sympathetic chain stimulation and measurement of femoral vascular conductance (FVC) at rest and during contraction of the triceps surae muscles. The percentage decrease in FVC to sympathetic stimulation (2 and 5 Hz) was determined at rest and during contraction before and after selective nNOS ( SMTC ) and non‐selective NO S blockade (L‐NAME ) . At rest, SMTC increased (p<0.05) vasoconstriction by a similar magnitude (p>0.05) in ET (2Hz: 7±2%; 5Hz: 7±2%) and S (2Hz: 5±2%; 5Hz: 6±2%). L‐NAME further increased (p<0.05) vasoconstriction by a similar amount (p>0.05) in ET (2Hz: 11±4%; 5Hz: 8±5%) and S (2Hz: 10±5%; 5Hz: 10±3%). During contraction, SMTC caused a larger (p<0.05) increase in the constrictor response in ET (2Hz:16±2%; 5Hz: 19±5%) compared to S (2Hz :9±4%; 5Hz: 9±4%), whereas the increase in the constrictor response with L‐NAME was not different (p>0.05) between ET (2Hz: 5±3%; 5Hz: 9±5%) and S (2Hz: 10±4%; 5Hz: 10±3%). These data demonstrate that ET improved nNOS‐mediated inhibition of sympathetic vasoconstriction in contracting muscle. Grant Funding Source : Supported by NSERC Canada and CFI

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207