MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984144780 · doi:10.1159/000136884

Effect of Release of Endogenous Gastrin on Myoelectrical and Mechanical Activity of Isolated Canine Stomach

2008· article· en· W1984144780 on OpenAlexaff
K. Kowalewski, S Zajaç, A. Kolodej

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndogenyGastrinStomachInternal medicineEndocrinologyCarnivoraChemistryMedicineSecretion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The myoelectrical and mechanical activities of the totally isolated, canine stomachs were recorded using five sets of bipolar silver-wire electrodes and one strain gauge. Stomachs were perfused extracorporeally with the blood of living supporting dogs which served as oxygenators and dialysers. Each supporting dog had a permanent antral pouch, accessible for the purpose of irrigation. To suppress the release of endogenous gastrin, this antral pouch and the antrum of the ex vivo stomach were irrigated with acid (pH 3). To induce the release of gastrin, one or both antra were irrigated with 0.2-percent acetylcholine or with 1 M glycine. To compare the action of endogenous gastrin with exogenous gastrin-like peptide, pentagastrin was infused into the gastric artery in doses of 4 mug/h and 8 mug/h. Control recordings were done during the acid irrigation. Endogenous gastrin released from antra by acetylcholine or glycine caused identical changes in the recordings as exogenous pentagastrin. There was a marked increase in the frequency of electrical control activity and of gastric contractions recorded as increased mechanical response. The results indicate that the ex vivo stomach can be used for study of the effect of endogenous gastrin musculature activity under the experimental conditions described.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacologySame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207