Development of gender‐specific cardiac hypertrophy: role of the nitric oxide synthase system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Gender‐specific differences in hormonal regulation may influence susceptibility to cardiac hypertrophy (CH). The nitric oxide synthase (NOS) and natriuretic peptide (NP) systems are homeostatic regulators of blood pressure; ablation of either system increases predisposition to hypertension and CH. Objective To elucidate how the NOS and NP systems work in concert, as well as the impact of estrogen on these systems using the atrial natriuretic peptide gene‐disrupted (ANP −/− ) mouse model. Methods At 13–16 weeks, female ANP +/+ and ANP −/− mice were euthanized during either the estrus (high estrogen) or proestrus (low estrogen) phases of their estrus cycle. Organs were harvested and left ventricle tissue gene expression of NOS system components were assessed using real‐time quantitative RT‐PCR. Results Female ANP +/+ at estrus had a decreased expression of iNOS, eNOS, sGCα1 and sGCβ1 as compared to female ANP +/+ at proestrus. Female ANP −/− at estrus had an increased expression of iNOS, eNOS, sGCα1 and sGCβ1 as compared to female ANP −/− at proestrus. Conclusions High estrogen levels led to a downregulation of the NOS system in ANP +/+ mice, and an upregulation of the NOS system in ANP −/− mice. Whether alteration in NOS system gene expression is a result of hypertension or reduction in circulating ANP levels remains to be determined. (Support from the Heart & Stroke Foundation of Ontario) Grant Funding Source : Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".