Gender‐modulated endogenous baseline neuropeptide Y Y<sub>1</sub>‐receptor activation in the hindlimb of Sprague‐Dawley rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of neuropeptide Y Y(1)-receptor blockade both alone, and in interaction with alpha(1)-adrenoceptor antagonism, on basal hindlimb vascular conductance in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats. Hindlimb vascular conductance was measured during infusion of BIBP3226 (Y(1)-receptor antagonist; 100 microg kg(-1)), prazosin (alpha(1)-receptor antagonist; 20 microg kg(-1)), and combined blockade. In males, vascular conductance increased 1.1 +/- 0.3 microl min(-1) mmHg(-1) above baseline with BIBP3226, and 2.4 +/- 0.4 microl min(-1) mmHg(-1) above baseline with prazosin (both P < 0.05). The increase in vascular conductance during combined blockade (5.1 +/- 0.7 microl min(-1) mmHg(-1)) was greater than the sum of the independent BIBP3226 and prazosin responses (P < 0.05). In females, basal hindlimb vascular conductance was unaffected by Y(1)-receptor blockade. However, alpha(1)-receptor blockade resulted in a 3.5 +/- 0.6 microl min(-1) mmHg(-1) increase in vascular conductance above baseline, which was not different than the combined blockade condition. Males had greater skeletal muscle neuropeptide Y concentration (P < 0.05; ELISA) than females. Furthermore, compared with females, male skeletal muscle contained greater Y(1)-receptor expression (P < 0.05; Western blot). It was concluded that, under baseline conditions, agonist and receptor-based mechanisms for Y(1)-receptor dependent control of vascular conductance in skeletal muscle was greater in male versus female rats.
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) | 0.001 | 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".