Differences in Cell-Type–Specific Responses to Angiotensin II Explain Cardiac Remodeling Differences in C57BL/6 Mouse Substrains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite indications that hearts from the C57BL/6N and C57BL/6J mouse substrains differ in terms of their contractility and their responses to stress-induced overload, no information is available about the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms. We tested whether subacute (48 hours) and chronic (14 days) administration of angiotensin II (500 ng/kg per day) had different effects on the left ventricles of male C57BL/6J and C57BL/6N mice. Despite higher blood pressure in C57BL/6J mice, chronic angiotensin II induced fibrosis and increased the left ventricular weight/body weight ratio and cardiac expression of markers of left ventricular hypertrophy to a greater extent in C57BL/6N mice. Subacute angiotensin II affected a greater number of cardiac genes in C57BL/6N than in C57BL/6J mice. Some of the most prominent differences were observed for markers of (1) macrophage activation and M2 polarization, including 2 genes (osteopontin and galectin-3) whose inactivation was reported as sufficient to prevent angiotensin II-induced myocardial fibrosis; and (2) fibroblast activation. These differences were confirmed in macrophage- and fibroblast-enriched populations of cells isolated from the hearts of experimental mice. When testing F2 animals, the amount of connective tissue present after chronic angiotensin II administration did not cosegregate with the inactivation mutation of the nicotinamide nucleotide transhydrogenase gene from C57BL/6J mice, thus discounting its possible contribution to differences in cardiac remodeling. However, expression levels of osteopontin and galectin-3 were cosegregated in hearts from angiotensin II-treated F2 animals and may represent endophenotypes that could facilitate the identification of genetic regulators of the cardiac fibrogenic response to angiotensin II.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".