Skin blood vessels are simultaneously innervated by sensory, sympathetic, and parasympathetic fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the known major role of skin blood vessel innervation in blood flow control, particularly in disease, little information on the co-innervation of blood vessels by sensory and autonomic fibers and the relationships of these fibers to one another is available. To fill this gap, we performed a light and electron microscopic analysis of the innervation of skin vessels by sensory and autonomic fibers by using the rat and monkey lower lips as a model. In rats, double-labeling immunocytochemistry revealed that combinations of fibers immunoreactive for substance P (SP) and dopamine-beta-hydroxylase (DbetaH), SP and vesicular acetylcholine transporter (VAChT), as well as DbetaH and VAChT occurred only around blood vessels in the lower dermis. All fiber types travelled in parallel and in close proximity to one another. In the upper dermis, blood vessels were innervated by SP-containing fibers only. Although nerve terminals displayed synaptic vesicles, synaptic specializations were never observed, suggesting that, in this territory, these fibers do not establish synaptic contacts. Quantification of the distance between the various immunoreactive terminals and their presumptive targets (smooth muscle cells and endothelial cells) revealed that both sympathetic and parasympathetic fibers were significantly closer to the endothelial cell layer and smooth muscle cells compared with sensory fibers. In monkeys, double-labeling immunocytochemistry was performed for SP-DbetaH and SP-VAChT only. The results obtained are similar to those found in rats; however, the fiber density was greater in monkeys. Our findings suggest that the regulation of skin microcirculation might be the result of the coordinated functions of sensory and autonomic fibers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".