MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prolactin‐releasing peptide effects in the rat brain are mediated through the Neuropeptide FF receptor

2009· article· en· W2160702622 on OpenAlexaff
Li Ma, David MacTavish, Frédéric Simonin, Jean‐Jacques Bourguignon, Takeshi Watanabe, Jack H. Jhamandas

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsInternal medicineReceptorEndocrinologyNeuropeptideChemistryBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prolactin-releasing peptide (PrRP), an RF amide peptide present in the brain, generates a wide variety of centrally generated autonomic responses, including increases in arterial blood pressure and heart rate. The identity of the receptor mediating the effects of PrRP is unknown. In addition to GPR10, which is its putative endogenous receptor, PrRP demonstrates a high binding affinity for Neuropeptide FF (NPFF) receptors, specifically the NPFF2 receptor. In the present study, we examined whether the central cardiovascular effects of PrRP in the intact animal and its cellular effects on parvocellular paraventricular nucleus (PVN) neurons are mediated via NPFF receptors. In conscious rats, intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) PrRP caused an increase in arterial blood pressure and heart rate, which was blocked with RF9, a specific NPFF receptor antagonist. These PrRP-evoked cardiovascular effects were preserved in the Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty (OLETF) rat strain, in which the GRP10 receptor gene was mutated. In rat brain slices, whole-cell patch clamp recordings of parvocellular paraventricular nucleus neurons show PrRP caused a decrease in evoked and miniature GABAergic inhibitory postsynaptic currents (IPSCs), effects that were antagonized by RF9, but not neuropeptide Y, a putative GPR10 receptor antagonist. The effects of PrRP on IPSCs in OLETF rats were similar to those in wild-type rats. Both in vivo and in vitro data strongly suggest that certain PrRP effects in the brain are expressed via NPFF receptors, probably NPFF2, rather than the GPR10 receptor. These observations may assume clinical relevance as RF amide peptides such NPFF and PrRP become therapeutic targets for a variety of autonomically related disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207