Relationships Between Distention-, Butyrate- and Pellet-Induced Stimulation of Peristalsis in the Mouse Colon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Luminal factors such as short-chain fatty acids are increasingly recognized for playing a regulatory role in peristaltic activity. Our objective was to understand the roles of butyrate and propionate in regulating peristaltic activity in relation to distention-induced activities. METHODS: Butyrate and propionate were perfused intraluminally under varying intraluminal pressures in murine colons bathed in Krebs solution. We used video recording and spatiotemporal maps to examine peristalsis induced by the intrinsic rhythmic colonic motor complex (CMC) as well as pellet-induced peristaltic reflex movements. RESULTS: The CMC showed several configurations at different levels of excitation, culminating in long distance contractions (LDCs) which possess a triangular shape in murine colon spatiotemporal maps. Butyrate increased the frequency of CMCs but was a much weaker stimulus than distention and only contributed to significant changes under low distention. Propionate inhibited CMCs by decreasing either their amplitudes or frequencies, but only in low distention conditions. Butyrate did not consistently counteract propionate-induced inhibition likely due to the multiple and distinct mechanisms of action for these signaling molecules in the lumen. Pellet movement occurred through ongoing CMCs as well as pellet induced peristaltic reflex movements and butyrate augmented both types of peristaltic motor patterns to decrease the amount of time required to expel each pellet. CONCLUSIONS: Butyrate is effective in promoting peristalsis, but only when the level of colonic activity is low such as under conditions of low intraluminal pressure. This suggests that it may play a significant role in patients with poor fiber intake, where there is low mechanical stimulation in the lumen.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".