MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990630289 · doi:10.1159/000233490

Effects of Compound 48/80 and Formyl-Methionyl-Leucyl-Phenylalanine on Isolated Guinea Pig Airways

2009· article· en· W1990630289 on OpenAlexaff
John F. Burka

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFondation pour la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsMepyramineHistamineContraction (grammar)Guinea pigChemistryParenchymaBradykininPharmacologyCompound 48/80BronchoconstrictionCyclooxygenaseBiochemistryEndocrinologyInternal medicineImmunologyBiologyDegranulationMedicineAsthmaPathologyAntagonistEnzymeReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compound 48/80 and formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine (fMLP), but not concanavalin A and dextran, contract isolated guinea pig tracheal spirals and lung parenchymal strips. fMLP induced a brief histamine-independent contraction of parenchymal strips. Tracheal contraction by fMLP was only observed in the presence of indomethacin, suggesting the involvement of a bronchoconstrictor lipoxygenase product of arachidonic acid (AA). Contractions induced by compound 48/80 were prolonged, were not dependent on extracellular calcium and were partly inhibited in the first 10 min by mepyramine, and after this by phenidone. Indomethacin enhanced contractions of trachea but inhibited contractions of parenchyma. Thus, histamine only contributes to the early part of compound 48/80-induced airway contractions, and lipoxygenase-derived AA products contribute after that. Bronchoconstrictor cyclooxygenase products may also contribute to parenchymal contractions. Compound 48/80 contracts the airways in a similar manner to antigen and thus may provide a useful model to examine mediator release and airway smooth muscle contraction.

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 score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied ImmunologySame topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207