Brain-derived neurotrophic factor acts at neurons of the subfornical organ to influence cardiovascular function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), a neurotrophin traditionally associated with neural plasticity, has more recently been implicated in fluid balance and cardiovascular regulation. It is abundantly expressed in both the central nervous system (CNS) and peripheral tissue, and is also found in circulation. Studies suggest that circulating BDNF may influence the CNS through actions at the subfornical organ (SFO), a circumventricular organ (CVO) characterized by the lack of a normal blood-brain barrier (BBB). The SFO, well-known for its involvement in cardiovascular regulation, has been shown to express BDNF mRNA and mRNA for the TrkB receptor at which BDNF preferentially binds. This study was undertaken to determine if: (1) BDNF influences the excitability of SFO neurons in vitro; and (2) the cardiovascular consequences of direct administration of BDNF into the SFO of anesthetized rats. Electrophysiological studies revealed that bath application of BDNF (1 nmol/L) influenced the excitability of the majority of neurons (60%, n = 13/22), the majority of which exhibited a membrane depolarization (13.8 ± 2.5 mV, n = 9) with the remaining affected cells exhibiting hyperpolarizations (-11.1 ± 2.3 mV, n = 4). BDNF microinjections into the SFO of anesthetized rats caused a significant decrease in blood pressure (mean [area under the curve] AUC = -364.4 ± 89.0 mmHg × sec, n = 5) with no effects on heart rate (mean AUC = -12.2 ± 3.4, n = 5). Together these observations suggest the SFO to be a CNS site at which circulating BDNF could exert its effects on cardiovascular regulation.
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) | 0.000 | 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".