Adenosine A<sub>1</sub> receptor-mediated inhibition of myocardial norepinephrine release involves neither phospholipase C nor protein kinase C but does involve adenylyl cyclase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stimulation of adenosine A1 receptors in the heart exerts cardioprotective effects by inhibiting norepinephrine (NE) release from sympathetic nerve endings. The intraneuronal signal transduction triggered by presynaptic adenosine A1 receptors is still not completely understood. The objective of the present study was to determine whether phospholipase C (PLC), protein kinase C (PKC), and adenylyl cyclase (AC) are involved in the adenosine A1 receptor-mediated inhibition of endogenous (stimulation-induced) NE release in isolated Langendorff-perfused rat hearts as an approach to elucidate their role in the cardiovascular system. Activation of adenosine A1-receptors with 2-chloro-N6-cyclopentyladenosine (CCPA) decreased cardiac NE release by approximately 40%. Inhibition of PLC with 1-[6-[[(17b)-3-methoxyestra-1,3,5(10)-trien-17-yl]amino]hexyl]-1H-pyrrole-2,5-dione (U 73122) as well as inhibition of PKC with 2-[1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)indol-3-yl]-3-(indol-3-yl)maleimide (GF 109203X) slightly but significantly decreased NE release; however, the suppressive effect of CCPA on NE release was not modulated by U 73122 or GF 109203X. Blockade of AC with 9-(tetrahydro-2'-furyl)adenine (SQ 22536) reversed the inhibitory effect of CCPA on sympathetic neurotransmitter release irrespective of whether PKC was pharmacologically activated by phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate or was not activated, indicating a PKC-independent but AC-dependent mechanism. Direct stimulation of AC with forskolin increased NE release by approximately 20%; an effect that was antagonized by either CCPA or SQ 22536. These data suggest that the adenosine A1 receptor-mediated inhibition of NE release does not involve PLC or PKC but does involve AC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".