MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors on Vagal Afferent Neurons

2001· review· en· W2056593541 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellis Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceNicotinic agonistCholinergicCiliary ganglionAcetylcholineAcetylcholine receptorReceptorBiologyChemistryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) play an important role in various processes involved in regulating systemic blood pressure. These receptors are expressed at excitatory cholinergic synapses between sympathetic preganglionic neurons and postganglionic sympathetic neurons and link the integrative activities of the CNS with peripheral effector mechanisms of the sympathetic nervous system. Nicotinic AChRs are also expressed on a subset of vagal afferent neurons, including those involved in baroreceptor reflexes. This review discusses the developmental expression of nAChRs on vagal afferent neurons and two factors that influence the differentiation of these neurons: ganglionic satellite cells and neurotrophins. In addition, this review discusses two important properties of neuronal nAChRs: inward rectification and calcium permeability. At the molecular level, intracellular polyamines, acting as gating particles, effectively block the receptor pore in a voltage-dependent manner, producing inward rectification. Moreover, a critical structural determinant underlies both the block by intracellular polyamines and calcium permeability. Finally, this review discusses the modulation and block of neuronal nAChRs by extracellular polyamines and the possible implications for neurodegenerative diseases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations20
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207