Revisiting lipid general anesthetic interactions (I): Thinned domain formation in supported planar bilayers induced by halothane and ethanol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A long-standing question in anesthesia is that of the molecular mechanism. Do anesthetics target proteins or change membrane properties or both? We used temperature-dependent magnetic A/C mode atomic force microscopy (AFM) to study interaction of the volatile anesthetics halothane and ethanol with model membranes made from supported planar bilayers (SPBs) of 1,2-dioleoyl-sn-3-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DOPC), dioleoyltrimethylammonium propane (DOTAP), or 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-3-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DPPC). We found that the incorporation of halothane or ethanol induces structural changes in the bilayer. These compounds cause thickness reduction in Lα bilayers (either globally or in domains) and the formation of domains with reduced thickness in Lβ phase bilayers. We propose that an anesthetic-induced increased area per lipid drives local chain disorder, thus promoting local phase change. The characteristics of SPBs with halothane or ethanol incorporated were compared with characteristics of the Lα and Lβ phases of anesthetic-free SPBs.Key words: atomic force microscopy, anesthesia, lipid bilayer domains, phase transition
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".