MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Inhibitory control of active expiration by the Kölliker‐Fuse in rats

2016· article· en· W2907218764 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Jenkin, William K. Milsom, Daniel B. Zoccal

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsExpirationHypercapniaPonsBrainstemMedicineVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaControl of respirationRespiratory systemCardiorespiratory fitnessInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breathing is critically dependent on synchronized activity generated by neural respiratory centres within the pons and medulla. When respiratory drive is elevated, active expiration (AE) is observed, typically expressed by abdominal muscle activity at the end of the expiratory phase (late‐E). It is currently unknown what role the dorsolateral pons, specifically the Kolliker‐Fuse (KF), plays in generating the AE breathing pattern. Using the decerebrated in situ working heart‐brainstem preparation of juvenile male Holtzman rats (60–70 g), motor output from the vagus, phrenic and abdominal nerves were recorded during baseline conditions. The preparations were then exposed to hypercapnic conditions (8% CO2) to recruit AE. Hypercapnia resulted in a significant increase in the amplitude of abdominal late‐E activity (Δ: 118±30%, P<0.05), with little change to the other recorded parameters. During hypercapnia, the pharmacological inhibition of the KF, with bilateral microinjections of (50–75 nL) isoguvacine (10 mM), caused a significant decrease in breathing frequency (Δ: −5±2 cpm, P<0.05) due to increased inspiratory time (0.86±0.1 vs 1.37±0.1 s, P<0.05). Interestingly, while there was no change to the overall expiratory time, the duration (1.86±0.21 vs 1.47±0.13 s, P<0.05) and amplitude (3.6±0.4 vs 0.7±0.2 μV, P<0.05) of post inspiratory (post‐I) vagal activity decreased while the onset of the abdominal late‐E bursts occurred significantly earlier (1.3±0.1 vs 2.4±0.2 s, P<0.05). No changes were observed in the abdominal late‐E burst amplitude after KF inhibition. These findings suggest that the KF plays a relevant inhibitory role in coordinating the transition between post‐I activity and AE during hypercapnia. Support or Funding Information Financial support: NSERC, FAPESP (2013/17251‐6) and NIH/NCCIH (1R01AT008632‐01).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep→French-language works237,207→