MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1913489848 · doi:10.1242/jeb.204.15.2647

THE effects of tonic lung inflation on ventilation in the American bullfrog <i>Rana catesbeiana</i> Shaw

2001· article· en· W1913489848 on OpenAlexaff
Colin E. Sanders, William K. Milsom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnesthesiaVentilation (architecture)LungMedicineVagus nerveControl of respirationBreathingRespiratory systemInternal medicineStimulationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to determine whether lung inflation stimulates or inhibits breathing in frogs by examining the effect of tonic lung inflation on the 'fictive' breathing pattern of decerebrate, unidirectionally ventilated bullfrogs. Neural discharge was monitored in the trigeminal nerve as an indication of the frequency and force of contraction of the buccal pump, and in the laryngeal branch of the vagus nerve as an indication of glottal opening, and hence fictive lung ventilation. Based on the temporal coordination of discharge in the trigeminal and vagus nerves during naturally occurring breaths it was possible to characterize the fictive breaths as inflation, deflation or balanced breaths. Increasing lung inflation increased absolute breathing frequency by reducing the duration of apnea between breaths and promoting a change in breathing pattern from no breathing to single breaths, breathing episodes and, finally, to continuous breathing. Associated with this was a decrease in the amplitude and area of the integrated trigeminal electroneurogram associated with the lung breaths, indicative of a reduction in the force of the buccal pump, and a shift in the timing of the trigeminal and vagal discharge, indicative of a shift from inflation to deflation breaths. Taken together the data suggest that lung deflation produces infrequent, large-amplitude inflation breaths or cycles, but that progressive lung inflation changes the breathing pattern to one of high-frequency attempts to deflate the lungs that are largely passive, and accompanied by contractions of the buccal pump that are no larger than those associated with normal buccal oscillations.

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 score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations36
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207