MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211728926 · doi:10.14814/phy2.12646

Intermittent neonatal hypoxia elicits the upregulation of inflammatory-related genes in adult male rats through long-lasting programming effects

2015· article· en· W2211728926 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ashley Gehrand, Mary L. Kaldunski, Eric D. Bruder, Shuang Jia, Martin J. Hessner, Hershel Raff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthAurora Research Institute
KeywordsDownregulation and upregulationHypoxia (environmental)MedicineGeneBioinformaticsIntermittent hypoxiaInternal medicineBiologyGeneticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The long-term effects of neonatal intermittent hypoxia (IH), an accepted model of apnea-induced hypoxia, are unclear. We have previously shown lasting "programming" effects on the HPA axis in adult rats exposed to neonatal IH. We hypothesized that neonatal rat exposure to IH will subsequently result in a heightened inflammatory state in the adult. Rat pups were exposed to normoxia (control) or six cycles of 5% IH or 10% IH over one hour daily from postnatal day 2-6. Plasma samples from blood obtained at 114 days of age were analyzed by assessing the capacity to induce transcription in a healthy peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) population and read using a high-density microarray. The analysis of plasma from adult rats previously exposed to neonatal 5% IH versus 10% IH resulted in 2579 significantly regulated genes including increased expression of Cxcl1, Cxcl2, Ccl3, Il1a, and Il1b. We conclude that neonatal exposure to intermittent hypoxia elicits a long-lasting programming effect in the adult resulting in an upregulation of inflammatory-related genes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.300
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207