Time Course of Morphometric Changes after Acute Allergic Bronchoconstriction in the Guinea Pig
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental allergic bronchoconstriction was induced in guinea pigs by passive sensitization with a standard dose of homologous antiserum followed by challenge with aerosolized antigen. Lungs were removed from animals at intervals of up to 6 days thereafter, and several parameters of the reaction were assessed morphometrically by comparison with lungs from unsensitized guinea pigs. We determined all changes in volume of the lung tissue resulting from fixation through to the preparation of histologic sections, but no significant differences were observed between the time course subgroups. The size of both large and small airways was assessed by a point-counting technique, as well as by measurement of the percentage of the diameter of the airways contributed by the mean thickness of the muscular layer. Maximal bronchoconstriction was observed morphometrically to correspond with the peak of a response as determined clinically by the use of a strain gauge around the chest. This was followed by a return to normal of the airway size. The number of mast cells and eosinophils around large and small airways, around branches of the pulmonary artery and in random fields of the lung parenchyma was tabulated. The maximal decrease in mast cells was seen in animals which died immediately following challenge, but the numbers were not restored to the control level even in animals which had survived for 6 days. The greatest increase in eosinophil response occurred in lungs obtained 10 min following challenge. This model will be of value in determining the effects at the tissue level of pharmacological inhibitors of this reaction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".