NOS 1 Is Required for Allergen-Induced Expression of NOS 2 in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although increased nitric oxide (NO) production in asthma is mediated largely by upregulation of the inducible form of nitric oxide synthase (iNOS, or NOS 2), some studies have suggested an important role for the usually constitutive neural NOS isoform (nNOS, or NOS 1). AIM: To investigate how NOS 1 may influence allergic inflammation, we used NOS 1 knockout mice and their wild-type (WT) controls. METHODS: Mice were sensitized and challenged with ovalbumin (OVA) using a protocol known to upregulate NOS 2 in the airways. RESULTS: In addition to expected increases in NOS 2 activity, OVA challenge led to increases in calcium-dependent NOS activity, which was accounted for by increased expression of NOS 1 at both mRNA (n = 5, p < 0.001) and protein levels (n = 5, p < 0.01). In NOS-1-deficient mice, OVA challenge induced less eosinophilia (n = 7, p < 0.05) and much less NO production (n = 10, p < 0.01) than in WT controls, reflecting not only the expected absence of NOS 1, but also lack of upregulation of NOS 2. This interaction appeared to be stimulus specific as NOS-1-deficient mice did upregulate NOS 2 following exposure to lipopolysaccharide (n = 5, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of NOS 1 in allergic airway inflammation and suggest a mechanism by which NOS 1 may influence overall NO production in the airways.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".