The Modulatory Effects of Noradrenaline on Vagal Control of Heart Rate in the Dogfish,<i>Squalus acanthias</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The possible interactions between inhibitory vagal control of the heart and circulating levels of catecholamines in dogfish (Squalus acanthias) were studied using an in situ preparation of the heart, which retained intact its innervation from centrally cut vagus nerves. The response to peripheral vagal stimulation typically consisted of an initial cardiac arrest, followed by an escape beat, leading to renewed beating at a mean heart rate lower than the prestimulation rate (partial recovery). Cessation of vagal stimulation led to a transient increase in heart rate, above the prestimulation rate. This whole response was completely abolished by 10(-4) M atropine (a muscarinic cholinergic antagonist). The degree of vagal inhibition was evaluated in terms of both the initial, maximal cardiac interval and the mean heart rate during partial recovery, both expressed as a percentage of the prestimulation heart rate. The mean prestimulation heart rate of this preparation (36+/-4 beats min(-1)) was not affected by noradrenaline but was significantly reduced by 10(-4) M nadolol (a beta-adrenergic receptor antagonist), suggesting the existence of a resting adrenergic tone arising from endogenous catecholamines. The degree of vagal inhibition of heart rate varied with the rate of stimulation and was increased by the presence of 10(-8) M noradrenaline (the normal in vivo level in routinely active fish), while 10(-7) M noradrenaline (the in vivo level measured in disturbed or deeply hypoxic fish) reduced the cardiac response to vagal stimulation. In the presence of 10(-7) M noradrenaline, 10(-4) M nadolol further reduced the vagal response, while 10(-4) M nadolol + 10(-4) M phentolamine had no effect, indicating a complex interaction between adrenoreceptors, possibly involving presynaptic modulation of vagal inhibition.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".