Effects of Paired Analogs of Angiotensin II and Angiotensin III on Rat Smooth Muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of several paired analogs of angiotensin II and angiotensin III, designed as antagonists, have been compared in isolated smooth muscle (rat uterus) and by in vivo rat blood pressure assay. These analogs were (1) the angiotensin II series: (1-sarcosine, 7-X, 8-isoleucine-) angiotensin II, and (2) the angiotensin III series: (1-despartyl, 7-X, 8-isoleucine)angiotensin II, where X=sarcosine, N-methyl-L-alanine or DL-nipecotic acid. All of these analogs had very low pressor and myotropic activities in the vagotomized, ganglion-blocked rat and the isolated rat uterus, respectively, although the angiotensin II analogs had significantly higher intrinsic pressor activity than the angiotensin III analogs. In addition, the angiotensin II analogs were potent antagonists of the contractile response to angiotensin II in the rat uterus whereas the angiotensin III analogs were weak inhibitors. These observations demonstrate the existence of functional differences for the proline residue in angiotensin II and angiotensin III analogs and may reflect differences in conformation and modes of binding to smooth muscle receptors between the two classes of peptides.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".