Sympathetic Discharges in intercostal and abdominal nerves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are hardly any published data on the characteristics of muscle nerve sympathetic discharges occurring in parallel with the somatic motoneurone discharges in the same nerves. Here, we take advantage of the naturally occurring respiratory activity in recordings of efferent discharges from branches of the intercostal and abdominal nerves in anesthetized cats to make this comparison. The occurrence of efferent spikes with amplitudes below that for alpha motoneurones were analyzed for cardiac modulation, using cross-correlation between the times of the R-wave of the ECG and the efferent spikes. The modulation was observed in nearly all recordings, and for all categories of nerves. It was strongest for the smallest amplitude spikes or spike-like waveforms, which were deduced to comprise postsynaptic sympathetic discharges. New observations were: (1) that the cardiac modulation of these discharges was modest compared to most previous reports for muscle nerves; (2) that the amplitudes of the sympathetic discharges compared to those of the somatic spikes were strongly positively correlated to nerve diameter, such that, for the larger nerves, their amplitudes overlapped considerably with those of gamma motoneurone spikes. This could be explained by random summation of high rates of unit sympathetic spikes. We suggest that under some experimental circumstances this overlap could lead to considerable ambiguity in the identity of the discharges in efferent neurograms.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".