Muscarinic excitation-contraction coupling mechanisms in tracheal and bronchial smooth muscles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the mechanisms underlying muscarinic excitation-contraction coupling in canine airway smooth muscle using organ bath, fura 2 fluorimetric, and patch-clamp techniques. Cyclopiazonic acid (CPA) augmented the responses to submaximal muscarinic stimulation in both tracheal (TSM) and bronchial smooth muscles (BSM), consistent with disruption of the barrier function of the sarcoplasmic reticulum. During maximal stimulation, however, CPA evoked substantial relaxation in TSM but not BSM. CPA reversal of carbachol tone persisted in the presence of tetraethylammoium or high KCl, suggesting that hyperpolarization is not involved; CPA relaxations were absent in tissues preconstricted with KCl alone or by permeabilization with beta-escin, ruling out a nonspecific effect on the contractile apparatus. Peak contractions were sensitive to inhibitors of tyrosine kinase (genistein) or Rho kinase (Y-27632). Sustained responses were dependent on Ca(2+) influx in TSM but not BSM; this influx was sensitive to Ni(2+) but not La(3+). In conclusion, there are several mechanisms underlying excitation-contraction coupling in airway smooth muscle, the relative importance of which varies depending on tissue and degree of stimulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".