Mechanisms of mechanical strain memory in airway smooth muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the hypothesis that mechanical deformation of airway smooth muscle induces structural remodeling of airway smooth muscle cells, thereby modulating mechanical performance in subsequent contractions. This hypothesis implied that past experience of mechanical deformation was retained (or "memorized") as structural changes in airway smooth muscle cells, which modulated the cell's subsequent contractile responses. We termed this phenomenon mechanical strain memory. Preshortening has been found to induce attenuation of both force and isotonic shortening velocity in cholinergic receptor-activated airway smooth muscle. Rapid stretching of cholinergic receptor-activated airway smooth muscle from an initial length to a final length resulted in post-stretch force and myosin light chain phosphorylation that correlated significantly with initial length. Thus post-stretch muscle strips appeared to retain memory of the initial length prior to rapid stretch (mechanical strain memory). Cytoskeletal recruitment of actin- and integrin-binding proteins and Erk 1/2 MAPK appeared to be important mechanisms of mechanical strain memory. Sinusoidal length oscillation led to force attenuation during oscillation and in subsequent contractions in intact airway smooth muscle, and p38 MAPK appeared to be an important mechanism. In contrast, application of local mechanical strain to cultured airway smooth muscle cells induced local actin polymerization and cytoskeletal stiffening. It is conceivable that deep inspiration-induced bronchoprotection may be a manifestation of mechanical strain memory such that mechanical deformation from past breathing cycles modulated the mechanical performance of airway smooth muscle in subsequent cycles in a continuous and dynamic manner.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".