Resveratrol Attenuates Thromboxane‐Prostanoid Receptor‐Mediated Vasocontraction via NO‐ and Endothelium‐ Independent Mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of resveratrol (RSV) on thromboxane‐prostanoid receptor (TPr)‐mediated vasocontraction. Dose‐response to the TPr agonist U46619 (‐9.0 ‐ ‐6.0 LogM) was examined in vitro in tissue baths using isometrically mounted common carotid arterial rings isolated from 20‐30 week old Wistar Kyoto rats (WKY; n=8) and Spontaneously Hypertensive rats (SHR; n=8). Endothelium‐intact (E + ) rings were pre‐incubated (for 30 minutes) with either no drug (ND); the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor L‐NAME (LN; 100 µM); RSV at either 20, 50, or 100 µM; or, LN+RSV‐20µM. Endothelium‐denuded (E ‐ ) rings were pre‐incubated with either ND or RSV‐20µM. The EC 50 for U46619 in E + was decreased in LN vs. ND WKY (LN: ‐8.12±0.05 Log M vs ND: ‐7.72±0.06, p<0.05), but not SHR. The combination effect of E + LN+RSV‐20 µM significantly decreased the maximum amplitude in WKY but not SHR. Increasing doses of RSV at 50 µM and 100 µM resulted in further increases in EC 50 for both WKY (‐7.16±0.04 and ‐6.83±0.08, respectively) and SHR (‐7.17±0.06 and ‐6.80±0.04,respectively), while only WKY exhibited a significant (p<0.05) decrease in the maximum amplitude. In E ‐ , WKY (RSV‐20µM: ‐7.46±0.08 LogM vs. ND) and SHR (RSV‐20µM: ‐7.63±0.06 LogM vs. ND) had significantly increased EC 50 with RSV‐20 µM incubation (p<0.05), while the maximum amplitude remained unaffected. These results suggest that acute pre‐incubation with RSV dose‐dependently attenuates TPr‐stimulated vasocontractile activity by a cell‐signalling mechanism that does not appear to require nitric oxide synthase or the endothelium. Funded by NSERC Canada
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) | 0.001 | 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".