MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2921446347 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz006.058

A59 EXPLORING THE ROLE OF MICROBIOTA IN GASTROINTESTINAL MOTILITY

2019· article· en· W2921446347 on OpenAlexaff
Xueqin Bai, Giada De Palma, Přemysl Berčík, Jianping Lu, Stephen M. Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCecumMotilityIleumGastric emptyingJejunumInternal medicineBiologyContractilitySmall intestineIn vivoEndocrinologyContraction (grammar)AcetylcholineGut floraStomachMedicineImmunologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between microbiota and gastrointestinal (GI) function may be evident from the early stage of life. Microbiota contributes to myenteric nerve development and normal gut function maintenance. Earlier studies suggested that germ-free or antibiotics treated mice have decreased gastrointestinal transit. Also, abnormal gut microbiota is common in patients with altered GI motility, like IBS. However, the underlying mechanism are not fully understood. Here, we investigated the role of microbiota in GI motility in vivo and vitro. Specific-pathogen-free (SPF) mice and germ-free (GF) mice (12–16 weeks old) were used. Gastric emptying was assessed by videofluoroscopy and GI transit was assessed by SHAPE study using metallic beads, as described previously. Mice were then sacrificed and samples from jejunum, ileum and mid-colon were taken. Isometric contraction was assessed after electric field stimulation (EFS) and pharmacological treatments. Acetylcholine (Ach) release was assessed by superfusion using isotope [3H]. Expression of genes related to neuromuscular function was assessed by Illumina, immunostaining was also performed. There were no significant difference in gastric emptying rates between SPF and GF mice, which were 26.4±4.1 % (n=10) and 23.1±3.1 % (n=11), respectively. However, GI transit (total scores) was faster in SPF mice compared to GF mice, with 13.6±1.7 (n=10) and 5.4±0.2 (n=11) respectively. Beads were mainly located in the cecum in SPF mice, but in GF mice, most of them remained in the proximal small intestine. In contractility studies, carbachol induced similar level of contraction in SPF or GF tissues, both in the small bowel and colon. In SPF tissues, the neural stimulation caused a transient contraction in jejunum, and biphasic relaxation and contraction in ileum and colon. In GF tissues, neural stimulation caused similar response in ileum and colon, however, in jejunum, it caused biphasic response with a significant relaxation followed by a contraction. No difference was seen in EFS-induced Ach release between SPF and GF tissues. Microbiota appears to be essential in the establishment of normal small intestinal motility. Germ-free mice have altered jejunal motility, likely due to a non-cholinergic neural response. Gene expression study and immunostaining are underway to reveal the underlying mechanism. None

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicGastrointestinal motility and disorders→French-language works237,207→