The Purinome and the preBötzinger Complex – A Ménage of Unexplored Mechanisms That May Modulate/Shape the Hypoxic Ventilatory Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exploration of purinergic signaling in brainstem homeostatic control processes is challenging the traditional view that the biphasic hypoxic ventilatory response, which comprises a rapid initial increase in breathing followed by a slower secondary depression, reflects the interaction between peripheral chemoreceptor-mediated excitation and central inhibition. While controversial, accumulating evidence supports that in addition to peripheral excitation, interactions between central excitatory and inhibitory purinergic mechanisms shape this key homeostatic reflex. The objective of this review is to present our working model of how purinergic signaling modulates the glutamatergic inspiratory synapse in the preBötzinger Complex (key site of inspiratory rhythm generation) to shape the hypoxic ventilatory response. It is based on the perspective that has emerged from decades of analysis of glutamatergic synapses in the hippocampus, where the actions of extracellular ATP are determined by a complex signaling system, the purinome. The purinome involves not only the actions of ATP and adenosine at P2 and P1 receptors, respectively, but diverse families of enzymes and transporters that collectively determine the rate of ATP degradation, adenosine accumulation and adenosine clearance. We summarize current knowledge of the roles played by these different purinergic elements in the hypoxic ventilatory response, often drawing on examples from other brain regions, and look ahead to many unanswered questions and remaining challenges.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".