Comparative Actions of Biologic and Synthetic Leukotrienes on Isolated Human Bronchus and Rat Mast Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of biologically prepared leukotriene C4 (LTCb) and leukotriene D4 (LTDb), obtained from rat monocytes stimulated with the calcium ionophore A23187, were compared with those of chemically synthetized leukotrienes (LTCs and LTDs) using two in vitro systems. All four leukotriene preparations (10(-10) to 6 X 10(-6) M) showed equal activity upon human bronchi, inducing slow, sustained contractions. LTCb alone (10(-7) to 6.9 X 10(-7) M) elicited histamine release and enhanced compound 48/80-induced release in a dose-dependent manner from rat mast cells. In contrast, LTDb alone was without effect but inhibited release caused by 48/80. FPL 55712 failed to block the LTCb and LTDb effects on the release process. The synthetic leukotrienes neither caused histamine release nor modulated 48/80-induced release from rat mast cells. We conclude that biologic and synthetic leukotrienes exhibit comparable contractile activity on isolated human bronchi but only biologic preparations modulate histamine release by previously unappreciated substances that isolate with the biologic leukotrienes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".