Increase in passive stiffness at reduced airway smooth muscle length: potential impact on airway responsiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The amplitude of strain in airway smooth muscle (ASM) produced by oscillatory perturbations such as tidal breathing or deep inspiration (DI) influences the force loss in the muscle and is therefore a key determinant of the bronchoprotective and bronchodilatory effects of these breathing maneuvers. The stiffness of unstimulated ASM (passive stiffness) directly influences the amplitude of strain. The nature of the passive stiffness is, however, not clear. In this study, we measured the passive stiffness of ovine ASM at different muscle lengths (relative to in situ length, which was used as a reference length, L(ref)) and states of adaptation to gain insights into the origin of this muscle property. The results showed that the passive stiffness was relatively independent of muscle length, possessing a constant plateau value over a length range from 0.62 to 1.25 L(ref). Following a halving of ASM length, passive stiffness decreased substantially (by 71%) but redeveloped over time ( approximately 30 min) at the shorter length to reach 65% of the stiffness value at L(ref), provided that the muscle was stimulated to contract at least once over a approximately 30-min period. The redevelopment and maintenance of passive stiffness were dependent on the presence of Ca(2+) but unaffected by latrunculin B, an inhibitor of actin filament polymerization. The maintenance of passive stiffness was also not affected by blocking myosin cross-bridge cycling using a myosin light chain kinase inhibitor or by blocking the Rho-Rho kinase (RhoK) pathway using a RhoK inhibitor. Our results suggest that the passive stiffness of ASM is labile and capable of redevelopment following length reduction. Redevelopment and maintenance of passive stiffness following muscle shortening could contribute to airway hyperresponsiveness by attenuating the airway wall strain induced by tidal breathing and DI.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".