Somatostatin-28 regulates GLP-1 secretion via somatostatin receptor subtype 5 in rat intestinal cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) bind somatostatin-14 (S-14) and somatostatin-28 (S-28), but SSTR5 has the highest affinity for S-28. To determine whether S-28 acting through SSTR5 mediates inhibition of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), fetal rat intestinal cell cultures were treated with somatostatin analogs with relatively high specificity for SSTRs 2-5. S-28 dose-dependently inhibited GLP-1 secretion stimulated by gastrin-releasing peptide more potently than S-14 (EC(50) 0.01 vs. 5.8 nM). GLP-1 secretion was inhibited by an SSTR5 analog, BIM-23268, more potently than S-14 and nearly as effectively as S-28. The SSTR5 analog L-372,588 also suppressed GLP-1 secretion equivalent to S-28, but a structurally similar peptide, L-362,855 (Tyr to Phe at position 7), was ineffective. An SSTR2-selective analog was less effective than S-28, and an SSTR3 analog was inactive. Separate treatment with GLP-1-(7-36)-NH(2) increased S-28 and S-14 secretion by three- and fivefold; BIM-23268 abolished S-28 without altering S-14, whereas the SSTR2 analog was inactive. The results indicate that somatostatin regulation of GLP-1 secretion occurs via S-28 through activation of SSTR5. GLP-1-stimulated S-28 secretion is also autoregulated by SSTR5 activation, suggesting a feedback loop between GLP-1 and S-28 modulated by SSTR5.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".