MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402436352 · doi:10.1093/sleep/30.4.478

Pentobarbital Sedation Increases Genioglossus Respiratory Activity in Sleeping Rats

2007· article· en· W2402436352 on OpenAlexaff
Magdy Younes, Eileen Park, Richard L. Horner

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenioglossusPentobarbitalAnesthesiaArousalSedationPlaceboMedicineInternal medicinePsychologyEndocrinologyObstructive sleep apneaNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether certain sedatives may, by increasing arousal threshold, allow pharyngeal dilator muscle activity to increase more in response to chemical stimuli before arousal occurs. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Thirteen chronically instrumented rats were studied during sleep following injections of placebo or sedating doses of pentobarbital (10 mg/kg). Intermittently, inspired CO2 was increased gradually until arousal occurred. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Maximum genioglossus activity reached before arousal was higher with pentobarbital than placebo (34.5 +/- 24.3 vs 3.7 +/- 2.9mV; P < 0.001) for 2 reasons. First, genioglossus activity was greater during undisturbed sleep before CO2 was applied (23.3 +/- 15.3 vs 2.5 +/- 1.5 mV, P < 0.001). When sleep periods were long, a ramp-like increase in genioglossus activity (GG-Ramp) began and progressed until arousal. GG-Ramps developed with both placebo and pentobarbital but reached higher levels with pentobarbital due to longer sleep periods and faster increase in genioglossus activity during the ramp. GG-Ramps began when diaphragm activity was lowest and progressed despite unchanged diaphragm activity. Second, as hypothesized, the increase in genioglossus activity with CO2 before arousal was greater than with placebo (11.2 +/- 2.5 vs 1.2 +/- 2.5mV; P < 0.05) due to increased arousal threshold. In 27 of 126 CO2 challenges delivered while GG-Ramps were in progress, genioglossus activity paradoxically decreased despite increased diaphragmatic activity. These negative responses occurred randomly in 7 of 13 rats. CONCLUSIONS: In rats: 1) Sedatives may allow genioglossus activity to reach higher levels during sleep. 2) A time-dependent increase in genioglossus activity occurs during undisturbed sleep that is unrelated to chemical drive. 3) Transient hypercapnia may elicit inhibition of genioglossus activity under currently unidentified circumstances.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations43
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207