A comparison of transient outward currents in canine cardiac Purkinje cells and ventricular myocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although abnormalities in Purkinje cell (PC) repolarization are important causes of cardiac arrhythmias, the detailed properties of repolarizing currents in PCs are incompletely understood. We compared transient outward K(+) current (I(to)) in single PCs from canine false tendons with midmyocardial ventricular myocytes (VMs). I(to) reactivation was biexponential, with a similar rapid-phase time constant (30 +/- 5 and 35 +/- 4 ms for VM and PC, respectively) but a large, slow component in PCs with a much greater time constant than VM (1,427 +/- 70 vs. 181 +/- 24 ms, P < 0.001). Tetraethylammonium had no effect on VM I(to) but reversibly inhibited PC I(to) (IC(50) = 2.4 +/- 0.4 mM). PC I(to) was also more sensitive to 4-aminopyridine (IC(50) = 50 +/- 7 vs. 526 +/- 49 microM in VM, P < 0.0001). H(2)O(2) slowed I(to) inactivation in PCs but did not affect VM I(to). We conclude that PC I(to) shows significant differences from VM I(to), with some features, such as tetraethylammonium sensitivity, that have been reported in neither cardiac I(to) of atrial or ventricular myocytes nor cloned K(+) channel subunits (Kv1.4, Kv4.2, or Kv4.3) known to participate in cardiac I(to).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".