MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055048452 · doi:10.1139/y06-106

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) and NPY receptors in the cardiovascular system: implication in the regulation of intracellular calciumThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled Young Investigators' Forum.

2007· review· en· W2055048452 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Danielle Jacques, Dima Abdel-Samad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec
KeywordsNeuropeptide Y receptorIntracellularEndocrinologyReceptorInternal medicineVascular smooth muscleCell typeBiologyCell biologyCalcium in biologySecretionCellChemistryNeuropeptideSmooth muscleMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 3-dimensional confocal microscopy technique has allowed us to identify the presence of yet another cardioactive factor and its receptor, namely neuropeptide Y (NPY) and its Y1 receptor, at the level of vascular smooth muscle cells and heart cells including endocardial endothelial cells (EECs). Using this technique, we also demonstrated that NPY is able to induce an increase in both cytosolic and nuclear calcium in all these cell types. Furthermore, besides being expressed at the level of EECs, NPY is also released from these cells following a sustained increase of intracellular Ca2+. This suggests the ability of NPY to contribute to the regulation of the excitation-secretion coupling of EECs and the excitation-contraction coupling of cardiomyocytes and vascular smooth muscle cells.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations39
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207