MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043101233 · doi:10.1159/000097319

Effects of Hyperbaric Exposure with High Oxygen Concentration on the Physical Activity of Developing Rats

2006· article· en· W2043101233 on OpenAlexaff
Akiko Matsumoto, T. Okiura, Fumiki Morimatsu, Yoshinobu Ohira, Akihiko Ishihara

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsConestoga Meat Packers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperbaric oxygenPlantaris muscleChemistryAnesthesiaHyperbaric oxygenationTurnoverOxygen toxicityHindlimbOxygenSoleus muscleEndocrinologyInternal medicineMedicineSkeletal muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of hyperbaric exposure with high oxygen concentration on the physical activity of developing male rats were investigated. Five-week-old male rats were exposed to an atmospheric pressure of 1.25 with an oxygen concentration of 36.0% for 12 h (7.00-19.00 h) and exercised voluntarily for 12 h (19.00-7.00 h) daily for 8 weeks. The voluntary running activities were compared with those in age-matched rats without hyperbaric exposure. In addition, the properties of the soleus and plantaris muscle fibers and their spinal motoneurons were examined. The voluntary running activities of rats with or without hyperbaric exposure increased during development. However, the mean voluntary running activities were higher in rats with hyperbaric exposure (7,104 m/day) than in those without hyperbaric exposure (4,932 m/day). The oxidative capacities of the soleus and plantaris muscle fibers and their spinal motoneurons increased following hyperbaric exposure. It is suggested that adaptations of neuromuscular units to hyperbaric exposure with high oxygen concentration enhance the metabolism, and thus, the function of neuromuscular units is promoted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeuroscienceSame topicGenetics and Physical PerformanceFrench-language works237,207