Kinetics of<i>in vitro</i>bronchoconstriction in an elastolytic mouse model of emphysema
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thin-slice videomicroscopy was used to examine the kinetics of constriction in small airways in situ. Balb/C mice inhaled elastase (0-20 IU), and were then left to recover for 14 days before euthanisation and lung removal. Cholinergic responsiveness was assessed in thin lung slices. Magnitude and velocity of narrowing in response to 10(-5) M acetylcholine (ACh), as well as the full concentration-response relationship for ACh (10(-8)-10(-5) M) were assessed. In vivo exposure to elastase was accompanied by statistically significantly decreased magnitudes and velocities of contraction, but no change in the ACh concentration-response relationship. Conversely, overnight, in vitro exposure of slices from control animals to elastase (2.5 microg.mL(-1)) resulted in increased magnitudes and velocities of airway narrowing, with impaired relaxation, as well as marked tearing of the airways from the surrounding parenchyma. These changes are characteristic of decreased tethering forces on the airway wall. Thus, the lung slice technique coupled with videomicroscopic analysis of airway contraction velocities provides a powerful tool to study airway-parenchymal interactions. The elastolytic model of emphysema, which manifests with airspace enlargement and loss of parenchymal attachments, is accompanied by decreased airway contraction kinetics. The mechanism(s) underlying this loss of function remain to be elucidated.
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 | 0.000 | 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".