Dual influence of spontaneous hypertension on membrane properties and ATP production in heart and kidney mitochondria in rat: effect of captopril and nifedipine, adaptation and dysadaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study deals with changes, induced by hypertension and its treatment, in the function and properties of mitochondria in the heart and kidneys. Male, 16-week-old hypertensive rats were allocated to 3 groups: (i) animals treated daily for 4 weeks with captopril (CAP, 80 mg·(kg body mass)(-1), n = 45), (ii) animals treated with CAP + nifedipine (NIF, 10 mg·kg(-1), n = 45), or (iii) untreated hypertensive controls (n = 96). Wistar rats (n = 96) were used as normotensive controls. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate (HR), and heart mass / body mass (HW/BW) ratio were measured at the beginning and end of the experiments; measurements for mitochondrial Mg(2+)-ATPase activity, O(2)-consumption (QO(2)), respiratory control index (RCI), ADP/O, oxidative phosphorylation rate (OPR), conjugated diene content (CD), and membrane fluidity (MF) were also taken at different time intervals. In the heart, elevated SBP, HR, and HW/BW accompanied increased QO(2), OPR, and Mg(2+)-ATPase activity, indicating an adaptive response to hypertension-induced increase in the energy demands of the myocardium. Treatments with CAP or with CAP + NIF were very similar in their prevention of increase in SBP, HR, HW/BW, and the rise in OPR (all p < 0.05-0.01). In the kidneys, hypertension induced a drop in OPR; however, antihypertensive therapy aggravated the resulting energy deficiency, whereby treatment with CAP + NIF was more detrimental than treatment with CAP alone. Heart and kidney mitochondria exhibited negligible changes in CD and moderately increased MF, which was more potentiated by treatment with CAP alone than with CAP + NIF.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".