Cholinergic dopamine release from the in vitro rabbit carotid body
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to test whether cholinergic mechanisms regulate dopamine (DA) release from the carotid body (CB) and interact with DA D(2) autoreceptors. One hundred forty-two CBs from adult rabbits were infused in vitro in a surviving medium bubbled with O(2) (Bairam A, Marchal F, Cottet-Emard JM, Basson H, Pequignot JM, Hascoet JM, and Lahiri S. J Appl Physiol 80: 20-24, 1996). CB DA content and release were measured after 1 h of exposure to various treatments: control, cholinergic agonist (0.1-50 microM carbachol), full muscarinic antagonist (1 and 10 microM atropine), antagonists of M(1) and M(2) muscarinic receptors (1 and 10 microM pirenzepine and 10 microM AFDX-116, respectively), and the DA D(2) receptor antagonist domperidone (1 microM), alone and with carbachol (1 microM). Compared with control, the release of DA was significantly increased by carbachol (1-50 microM), AFDX-116, and domperidone and decreased by atropine (10 microM) and pirenzepine (10 microM). The effects of domperidone and carbachol were not significantly different but were clearly additive. It is concluded that, in the rabbit CB, M(1) and M(2) muscarinic receptor subtypes may be involved in the control of DA release, in addition to the DA D(2) autoreceptors.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".