MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588658638 · doi:10.1159/000097346

Vagal Afferent Nerve Fibres Contact Mast Cells in Rat Small Intestinal Mucosa

2010· article· en· W1588658638 on OpenAlexaff
Ruth M. Williams, Hans-Rudolf Berthoud, Ron H. Stead

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImmunoModulation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMast cells and histamine
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsAfferentIntestinal mucosaNeuroscienceMast cellBiologyMedicinePathologyChemistryCell biologyAnatomyImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mast cells degranulate when exposed to specific antigens (via surface bound IgE), resulting in the release of numerous pro-inflammatory mediators. Neuroregulatory substances also activate mast cells, and may effect differential mediator release, without degranulation, suggesting a role for nerves in modulating mast cell activity. We previously investigated the microanatomical relationships of intestinal mucosal mast cells (IMMC) with nerves and found extensive associations in the intestinal mucosae of rats and humans. The origins of nerves that contact IMMC have not been determined; however, recent morphological and functional studies suggest the possibility that the vagus nerve might be involved. In the current study we show that vagal afferent fibers (labeled by injecting DiI into the nodose ganglion) penetrate to the tips of jejunal villi; and that some of these nerves make intimate contact with IMMC. These data provide the microanatomical basis for direct neural communication between the central nervous system (CNS) and mast cells in the gastrointestinal mucosa.

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 score0.005

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations126
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImmunoModulationSame topicMast cells and histamineFrench-language works237,207