Bronchial Responsiveness among Inbred Mouse Strains: Role of Airway Smooth-Muscle Shortening Velocity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the relationship between bronchial responsiveness and airway smooth-muscle (ASM) contractile properties, we studied inbred mice with known interstrain differences in airway responsiveness. Using oscillatory mechanics, we confirmed that A/J mice were hyperresponsive to methacholine (MCh) as compared with mice of the C3H/HeJ and C57BL/6J strains. Analysis of respiratory system resistance and elastance at different flow oscillation frequencies indicated that interstrain differences in responsiveness are present in both central and peripheral airways of these mice. We used video microscopy to measure the rate of contraction of explanted airways, and found that the airways of A/J mice contracted more rapidly than those of C3H/HeJ or C57BL/6J mice. In studies of a fourth strain (Balb/C) of mice, we found both bronchial hyperresponsiveness and increased ASM shortening velocity. The rank order of responsiveness among strains was the same as that for shortening velocity (A/J > Balb/C > C3H/HeJ > C57BL/6J). Furthermore, in each strain of mice, shortening velocity correlated with the achieved degree of airway narrowing and with a greater likelihood of airway closure in individual airways. In contrast, generation of isometric tension in trachealis, morphometric measurements of tracheal ASM, tracheal myosin content, and dose-response curves for MCh of explanted intraparenchymal bronchi failed to correspond to the in vivo phenotype of airway reactivity. These results indicate that bronchial responsiveness is related to ASM shortening velocity, and underscore the importance of smooth-muscle dynamics in understanding the mechanisms of bronchial responsiveness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".