MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007575308 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz047.121

A122 THE INFLUENCE OF SEX AND THE GUT MICROBIOTA ON VISCERAL PAIN SENSITIVITY IN MICE

2020· article· en· W3007575308 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Pujo, Giada De Palma, Jun Lü, Stephen M. Collins, Přemysl Berčík

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisceral painNodose GanglionSensory systemTRPV1Gut floraDorsal root ganglionInternal medicineEndocrinologyAgonistReceptorPathophysiologyNociceptionBiologyMedicineStimulationTransient receptor potential channelImmunologyNeuroscienceVagus nerve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Abdominal pain is a common complaint in patients with chronic gastrointestinal disorders. Its treatment is of limited efficacy as the pathophysiology is largely unknown. Accumulating evidence suggests that gut microbiota is an important determinant of gut function, including visceral sensitivity. Germ-free (GF) mice have been shown to have altered pain signaling, which normalizes after colonization. Sex also appears to play a key role in visceral sensitivity, as abdominal pain is diagnosed predominantly in female patients. Thus, both gut bacteria and sex are important in the regulation of gut nociception, but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. Aims To investigate the role of gut microbiota and sex in abdominal pain. Methods We used primary cultures of sensory neurons from dorsal root ganglia (DRG) of female and male conventional mice (SPF) or germ-free (GF) mice, age 7–18 weeks. To study the visceral afferent activity in vitro, calcium mobilization in DRG sensory neurons was measured by inverted fluorescence microscope using a fluorescent calcium probe Fluo-4 (1mM). Two parameters were considered: i) percentage of responding neurons and ii) intensity of neuronal response. First, DRG sensory neurons were stimulated by a TRPV1 agonist capsaicin (12.5nM, 125nM and 1.25µM) or by an agonist mix of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR: bradykinin, histamine and serotonin; 1µM, 10µM and 100µM). We next cultured Escherichia coli JM83 (E. coli) and Enterobacter aerogenes (E. aer) overnight in LB and LDMIIG medium, respectively. Bacterial supernatant of 1010 CFU/mL was diluted to 1% in Krebs Ringer solution to treat DRG neurons from GF/SPF mice and calcium mobilization was measured. Results The percentage of neurons responding to capsaicin and GPCR agonist was similar in SPF male and SPF female. In contrast, the intensity of the neuronal response was higher in SPF male compared to SPF female mice in response to capsaicin (125nM p<0.035 and 1.25µM p<0.038) but not in response to GPCR. The same trend was observed in GF mice. Neuronal activation induced by capsaicin or GPCR agonist was similar in SPF and GF mice. While bacterial supernatant from E. coli did not affect the activity of sensory neurons, the bacterial supernatant from E. aer induced changes in calcium mobilization in DRG neurons. Conclusions Our data suggest that at the level of DRG neurons from healthy mice, female sex and the absence of gut microbiota do not predispose to visceral hypersensitivity. In fact, the intensity of neuronal responses to capsaicin appear to be higher in DRGs from male mice. Furthermore, we show that metabolites from certain bacteria can activate sensory neurons. Thus, further studies are needed to investigate the role of gut microbiota and sex in visceral sensitivity Funding Agencies CIHR

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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