The complex contribution of NOS interneurons in the physiology of cerebrovascular regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the discovery of the vasorelaxant properties of nitric oxide (NO) by Furchgott and Ignarro, the finding by Bredt and coll. of a constitutively expressed NO synthase in neurons (nNOS) led to the presumption that neuronal NO may control cerebrovascular functions. Consequently, numerous studies have sought to determine whether neuraly-derived NO is involved in the regulation of cerebral blood flow (CBF). Anatomically, axons, dendrites, or somata of NO neurons have been found to contact the basement membrane of blood vessels or perivascular astrocytes in all segments of the cortical microcirculation. Functionally, various experimental approaches support a role of neuronal NO in the maintenance of resting CBF as well as in the vascular response to neuronal activity. Since decades, it has been assumed that neuronal NO simply diffuses to the local blood vessels and produce vasodilation through a cGMP-PKG dependent mechanism. However, NO is not the sole mediator of vasodilation in the cerebral microcirculation and is known to interact with a myriad of signaling pathways also involved in vascular control. In addition, cerebrovascular regulation is the result of a complex orchestration between all components of the neurovascular unit (i.e., neuronal, glial, and vascular cells) also known to produce NO. In this review article, the role of NO interneuron in the regulation of cortical microcirculation will be discussed in the context of the neurovascular unit.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".