Purinergic modulation of preBötzinger complex inspiratory rhythm in rodents: the interaction between ATP and adenosine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ATP signalling in the CNS is mediated by a three-part system comprising the actions of ATP (and ADP) at P2 receptors (P2Rs), adenosine (ADO) at P1 receptors (P1Rs), and ectonucleotidases that degrade ATP into ADO. ATP excites preBötzinger complex (preBötC) inspiratory rhythm-generating networks where its release attenuates the hypoxic depression of breathing. Its metabolite, ADO, inhibits breathing through unknown mechanisms that may involve the preBötC. Our objective is to understand the dynamics of this signalling system and its influence on preBötC networks. We show that the preBötC of mouse and rat is sensitive to P2Y(1) purinoceptor (P2Y(1)R) activation, responding with a >2-fold increase in frequency. Remarkably, the mouse preBötC is insensitive to ATP. Only after block of A(1) ADORs is the ATP-evoked, P2Y(1)R-mediated frequency increase observed. This demonstrates that ATP is rapidly degraded to ADO, which activates inhibitory A(1)Rs, counteracting the P2Y(1)R-mediated excitation. ADO sensitivity of mouse preBötC was confirmed by a frequency decrease that was absent in rat. Differential ectonucleotidase activities are likely to contribute to the negligible ATP sensitivity of mouse preBötC. Real-time PCR analysis of ectonucleotidase isoforms in preBötC punches revealed TNAP (degrades ATP to ADO) or ENTPDase2 (favours production of excitatory ADP) as the primary constituent in mouse and rat, respectively. These data further establish the sensitivity of this vital network to P2Y(1)R-mediated excitation, emphasizing that individual components of the three-part signalling system dramatically alter network responses to ATP. Data also suggest therapeutic potential may derive from methods that alter the ATP-ADO balance to favour the excitatory actions of ATP.
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 | 0.001 | 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".