Differences in Intracellular pH Regulation by Na+/H+ Antiporter among Two-Cell Mouse Embryos Derived from Females of Different Strains1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regulation of intracellular pH (pH(i)) by two-cell-stage embryos derived from female mice of three different strains (CF-1, Balb/c, and BDF) was investigated. Embryos recovered at a slow rate from intracellular acidosis produced by a pulse of NH(4)Cl; the rate did not differ significantly among strains. Recovery was reversibly inhibited by amiloride or the absence of Na(+), implicating Na(+)/H(+) antiporter activity. The threshold pH(i) (setpoint) below which Na(+)/H(+) antiporter activity was elicited was approximately 7.15 for each strain. No recovery from induced acidosis occurred in the absence of external Na(+) in any strain, and thus embryos could be maintained in acidosis for an extended period. Upon reintroduction of Na(+), embryos derived from either CF-1 or BDF females recovered at a slow rate comparable to that measured in embryos not maintained for a period in Na(+)-free medium, but embryos derived from Balb/c females consistently recovered at a highly accelerated rate. This accelerated recovery appeared to be due, in part, to an activation of the Na(+)/H(+) antiporter in Balb/c-derived embryos, which did not occur in CF-1- or BDF-derived embryos. Thus, embryos derived from different strains of female mice differ in their control of mechanisms for pH(i) regulation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".