Baroreflex mechanisms regulating the occurrence of neural spikes in human muscle sympathetic nerve activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tested the hypothesis that the discharge patterns of action potentials (APs) within bursts of postganglionic muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) are subject to arterial baroreflex control but in a manner that varies inversely with AP size. MSNA data were collected over 5 min of supine rest in 15 young and healthy individuals (8 males; 24 ± 4 yr of age; means ± SD). The baroreflex threshold and sensitivity diagrams were constructed for both the integrated sympathetic bursts and for the AP clusters. For the integrated bursts, a strong linear relationship between burst probability and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was observed (P < 0.05). There was little relationship between integrated burst strength (amplitude) and DBP. On average, 12 AP clusters were observed across individuals. Larger APs tended to appear in the larger bursts. Linear regression analysis was used to study the baroreflex threshold (probability of AP cluster occurrence vs. DBP) as well as the baroreflex sensitivity (AP cluster size vs. DBP). A significant reflex threshold relationship was observed in 75-100% of AP clusters across all individuals. In contrast, significant reflex sensitivity relationships were observed in only 9 of 15 individuals and for limited APs. Overall, the slope of the AP baroreflex threshold relationship was greater for the small-medium sized AP clusters than that of the larger APs. Therefore, within each burst, the small-medium sized APs are governed by the baroreflex mechanism. However, the large APs, which tend to appear in the large integrated bursts, are weakly associated with a baroreflex control feature. The variable impact of baroreflex control over AP occurrence provides a plausible explanation for the overall weak baroreflex control over integrated burst strength, a feature that is determined by both the number and size of the AP complement.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".