MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Iodide and bromide inhibit Ca<sup>2+</sup>uptake by cardiac sarcoplasmic reticulum

2001· article· en· W2178475373 on OpenAlexaff
Gary J. Kargacin, Zenobia Ali, Shi‐Jin Zhang, Natashka S. Pollock, Margaret E. Kargacin

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndoplasmic reticulumChemistryVesicleIodideBromideCalciumPermeability (electromagnetism)BiophysicsMembraneRuthenium redNuclear chemistryInorganic chemistryBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies indicate that the Ca(2+) permeability of the sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) can be affected by its anionic environment. Additionally, anions could directly modulate the SR Ca(2+) pump or the movement of compensatory charge across the SR membrane during Ca(2+) uptake or release. To examine the effect of anion substitution on cardiac SR Ca(2+) uptake, fluorometric Ca(2+) measurements and spectrophotometric ATPase assays were used. Ca(2+) uptake into SR vesicles was inhibited in a concentration-dependent manner when Br(-) or I(-) replaced extravesicular Cl(-) (when Br(-) completely replaced Cl(-), uptake velocity was approximately 70% of control; when I(-) completely replaced Cl(-), uptake velocity was approximately 39% of control). Replacement of Cl(-) with SO(2)(-4) had no effect on SR uptake. Although both I(-) and Br(-) inhibited net Ca(2+) uptake, neither anion directly inhibited the SR Ca(2+) pump nor did they increase the permeability of the SR membrane to Ca(2+). Our results support the hypothesis that an anionic current that occurs during SR Ca(2+) uptake is reduced by the substitution of Br(-) or I(-) for Cl(-).

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→