Anoxic persistence of lumbar respiratory bursts and block of lumbar locomotion in newborn rat brainstem–spinal cords
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tolerance of breathing in neonates to oxygen depletion is reflected by persistence of inspiratory-related motor output during sustained anoxia in newborn rat brainstem preparations. It is not known whether lumbar motor networks innervating expiratory abdominal muscles are, in contrast, inhibited by anoxia similar to locomotor networks in neonatal mouse lumbar cords. To test this, we recorded inspiratory-related cervical/hypoglossal plus pre/postinspiratory lumbar/facial nerve activities and, sometimes simultaneously, locomotor rhythms in newborn rat brainstem-spinal cords. Chemical anoxia slowed 1 : 1-coupled cervical and lumbar respiratory rhythms and induced cervical burst doublets associated with depressed preinspiratory and augmented postinspiratory lumbar activities. Similarly, anoxia evoked repetitive hypoglossal bursts and shifted facial activity toward augmented postinspiratory bursting in medullas without spinal cord. Selective lumbar anoxia augmented pre/postinspiratory lumbar bursting without slowing the rhythm. This suggests a medullary origin of both anoxic inspiratory double bursts and preinspiratory depression, but a mixed medullary/lumbar origin of boosted postinspiratory lumbar activity. Lumbar respiratory rhythm is likely to be generated by the parafacial respiratory group expiratory centre as indicated by lack of normoxic and anoxic bursting following brainstem transection between the facial motonucleus and the more caudal pre-Bötzinger complex inspiratory centre. Opposed to sustained respiratory activities, anoxia reversibly abolished non-rhythmic spinal discharges and electrically or chemically evoked lumbar locomotor activities, followed by pronounced postanoxic spinal hyperexcitability. We hypothesize that (i) the anoxia tolerance of neonatal breathing includes pFRG-driven lumbar expiratory networks, (ii) the anoxic respiratory pattern transformation is due to disturbed inspiratory-expiratory centre interactions, and (iii) postanoxic lumbar hyperexcitability contributes to spasticity in cerebral palsy.
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) | 0.001 | 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".