Interaction between angiotensin <scp>II</scp> and glucose sensing at the subfornical organ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subfornical organ ( SFO ) lacks the normal blood‐brain barrier and senses the concentrations of many different circulating signals, including glucose and angiotensin II ( ANG II ). ANG II has recently been implicated in the control of food intake and body weight gain. The present study assessed whether single SFO neurones sense changes in glucose and ANG II , and also whether changes in glucose concentration alter the responsiveness of these neurones to ANG II . SFO neurones dissociated from male Sprague‐Dawley rats (100‐175 g) were used. We first examined whether glucose concentration modulates AT 1 receptor expression. Similar AT 1a mRNA expression levels were found at glucose concentrations of 1, 5 and 10 mmol L ‐1 in dissociated SFO neurones. Glucose responsiveness of SFO neurones was assessed using perforated current‐clamp recordings and switching between 5 and 10 mmol L ‐1 glucose artificial cerebrospinal fluid to classify single neurones as nonresponsive ( nGS ), glucose‐excited ( GE ) or glucose‐inhibited ( GI ). In total, 26.7% of the SFO neurones were GI (n = 24 of 90), 21.1% were GE (n = 19 of 90) and 52.2% were nGS (n = 47 of 90). Once classified, the effects of 10 nmol L ‐1 ANG II on the excitability of these neurones were tested, with 52% of GE (n = 10 of 19), 71% of GI (n = 17 of 24) and 43% of nGS (n = 20 of 47) neurones being ANG II sensitive. Finally, we tested whether acute changes in glucose concentration modified the response to ANG II and showed that some neurones (4/17) only respond to ANG II at 10 mmol L ‐1 glucose. Our data demonstrate that the same SFO neurone can sense glucose and ANG II and that acute changes in glucose concentration may change ANG II responsiveness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".