MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923687638 · doi:10.1113/jp277663

Baroreflex control of sympathetic vasomotor activity and resting arterial pressure at high altitude: insight from Lowlanders and Sherpa

2019· article· en· W2923687638 on OpenAlexafffund
Lydia L. Simpson, Stephen A. Busch, Samuel J. Oliver, Philip N. Ainslie, Mike Stembridge, Craig D. Steinback, Jonathan P. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHigh Altitude and Hypoxia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsBritish Heart FoundationUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsBaroreflexVasomotorCardiologyBlood pressureInternal medicineSympathetic nervous systemMedicineEffects of high altitude on humansBaroreceptorHeart rateAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points Hypoxia, a potent activator of the sympathetic nervous system, is known to increase muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) to the peripheral vasculature of native Lowlanders during sustained high altitude (HA) exposure. We show that the arterial baroreflex control of MSNA functions normally in healthy Lowlanders at HA, and that upward baroreflex resetting permits chronic activation of basal sympathetic vasomotor activity under this condition. The baroreflex MSNA operating point and resting sympathetic vasomotor outflow both are lower for highland Sherpa compared to acclimatizing Lowlanders; these lower levels may represent beneficial hypoxic adaptation in Sherpa. Acute hyperoxia at HA had minimal effect on baroreflex control of MSNA in Lowlanders and Sherpa, raising the possibility that mechanisms other than peripheral chemoreflex activation contribute to vascular sympathetic baroreflex resetting and sympathoexcitation. These findings provide a better understanding of sympathetic nervous system activation and the control of blood pressure during the physiological stress of sustained HA hypoxia. Abstract Exposure to high altitude (HA) is characterized by heightened muscle sympathetic neural activity (MSNA); however, the effect on arterial baroreflex control of MSNA is unknown. Furthermore, arterial baroreflex control at HA may be influenced by genotypic and phenotypic differences between lowland and highland natives. Fourteen Lowlanders (12 male) and nine male Sherpa underwent haemodynamic and sympathetic neural assessment at low altitude (Lowlanders, low altitude; 344 m, Sherpa, Kathmandu; 1400 m) and following gradual ascent to 5050 m. Beat‐by‐beat haemodynamics (photoplethysmography) and MSNA (microneurography) were recorded lying supine. Indices of vascular sympathetic baroreflex function were determined from the relationship of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and corresponding MSNA at rest (i.e. DBP ‘operating pressure’ and MSNA ‘operating point’), as well as during a modified Oxford baroreflex test (i.e. ‘gain’). Operating pressure and gain were unchanged for Lowlanders during HA exposure; however, the operating point was reset upwards (48 ± 16 vs . 22 ± 12 bursts 100 HB −1 , P = 0.001). Compared to Lowlanders at 5050 m, Sherpa had similar gain and operating pressure, although the operating point was lower (30 ± 13 bursts 100 HB −1 , P = 0.02); MSNA burst frequency was lower for Sherpa (22 ± 11 vs . 30 ± 9 bursts min −1 P = 0.03). Breathing 100% oxygen did not alter vascular sympathetic baroreflex function for either group at HA. For Lowlanders, upward baroreflex resetting promotes heightened sympathetic vasoconstrictor activity and maintains blood pressure stability, at least during early HA exposure; mechanisms other than peripheral chemoreflex activation could be involved. Sherpa adaptation appears to favour a lower sympathetic vasoconstrictor activity compared to Lowlanders for blood pressure homeostasis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicHigh Altitude and HypoxiaFrench-language works237,207