Lysozyme, a mediator of sepsis, impairs the cardiac neural adrenergic response by nonendothelial release of NO and inhibitory G protein signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously showed that lysozyme (Lzm-S), derived from leukocytes, caused myocardial depression in canine sepsis by binding to the endocardial endothelium to release nitric oxide (NO). NO then diffuses to adjacent myocytes to activate the cGMP pathway. In a canine right ventricular trabecular (RVT) preparation, Lzm-S also decreased the inotropic response to field stimulation (FSR) during which the sympathetic and parasympathetic nerves were simulated to measure the adrenergic response. In the present study, we determined whether the pathway by which Lzm-S decreased FSR was different from the pathway by which Lzm-S reduced steady-state (SS) contraction. Furthermore, we determined whether the decrease in FSR was due to a decrease in sympathetic stimulation or enhanced parasympathetic signaling. In the RVT preparation, we found that the inhibitory effect of Lzm-S on FSR was prevented by NO synthase (NOS) inhibitors. A cGMP inhibitor also blocked the depressant activity of Lzm-S. However, in contrast to the Lzm-S-induced decline in SS contraction, chemical removal of the endocardial endothelium by Triton X-100 to eliminate endothelial NO release did not prevent the decrease in FSR. An inhibitory G protein was involved in the effect of Lzm-S, since FSR could be restored by treatment with pertussis toxin. Atropine prevented the Lzm-S-induced decline in FSR, whereas beta(1)- and beta(2)-adrenoceptor function was not impaired by Lzm-S. These results indicate that the Lzm-S-induced decrease in FSR results from a nonendothelial release of NO. NO then acts through inhibitory G protein to enhance parasympathetic signaling.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".