Neurosteroid modulation of respiratory rhythm in rats during the perinatal period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurosteroids regulate neuronal excitability and are expressed at particularly high levels in the CNS during the perinatal period. Further, neurosteroid levels are increased by a variety of stressors including hypoxia, asphyxia, parturition, ethanol exposure and infection. One mechanism by which neurosteroids regulate neuronal activity is by negative or positive modulation of GABA(A) receptor function. Perinatal respiration is strongly modulated by GABAergic synaptic drive, and GABA release is increased during hypoxia to contribute to hypoxia-induced depression of neonatal ventilation. Here, we use in vitro and in vivo rat models to test the hypothesis that GABA(A) receptor-mediated modulation of perinatal respiration is markedly influenced by the presence of neurosteroids. The principal finding of this study was that the efficacy of GABA(A) receptor-mediated modulation of respiratory membrane potential and rhythmogenesis is markedly enhanced by allopregnanolone and depressed by dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate. These data demonstrate that the modulation of breathing via GABA(A) receptor activation will be determined by the overall balance of negative and positive neurosteroid modulators within respiratory nuclei. This adds a level of complexity that must be considered when examining the depression of breathing in mammals associated with various behavioural states and pathogenic conditions such as apnoea and sudden death suspected to be associated with central respiratory dysfunction.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".