MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3133549317 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.008

A9 DORSAL ROOT GANGLIA NEURONAL RESPONSES AND SUBSTANCE P PRODUCTION ARE HIGHER IN MALE MICE

2021· article· en· W3133549317 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Pujo, Giada De Palma, Jianping Lu, Stephen M. Collins, P Bercík

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstance PCalcitonin gene-related peptideNociceptionVisceral painCapsaicinInternal medicineAgonistEndocrinologyTRPV1Dorsal root ganglionSensory systemSensory neuronNociceptorSerotoninReceptorNeuropeptideBiologyMedicineNeuroscienceTransient receptor potential channel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Abdominal pain is a common complaint in patients with chronic gastrointestinal disorders. Accumulating evidence suggests that gut microbiota is an important determinant of gut function, including visceral sensitivity. Germ-free (GF) mice have been shown to display visceral hypersensitivity, which normalizes after colonization. Sex also appears to play a key role in visceral sensitivity, as women report more abdominal pain than men. 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 conventionally raised (SPF) or germ-free (GF) mice (7–18 weeks old). 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) the percentage of responding neurons ii) the intensity of the neuronal response. First, DRG sensory neurons were stimulated by a TRPV1 agonist capsaicin (12.5nM, 125nM and 1.25µM) or by a mixture of G-protein coupled receptors agonist (GPCR: bradykinin, histamine and serotonin; 1µM, 10µM and 100µM). We next measured the neuronal production of substance P and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), two neuropeptides associated with nociception, in response to capsaicin (1.25µM) or GPCR agonists (100µM) by ELISA and EIA, respectively. Results The percentage of neurons responding to capsaicin and GPCR agonists was similar in male and female SPF and GF mice. However, the intensity of the neuronal response was higher in SPF male compared to SPF female in response to capsaicin (125nM: p=0.0336; 1.25µM: p=0.033) but not to GPCR agonists. Neuronal activation was similar in GF and SPF mice of both sexes after administration of capsaicin or GPCR agonists. Furthermore, substance P and CGRP production by sensory neurons induced by capsaicin or GPCR agonists was similar in SPF and GF mice, regardless of sex. However, while the response to capsaicin was similar, the GPCR agonists-induced production of substance P was higher in SPF male mice compared to SPF females (p=0.003). The GPCR agonists-induced production of CGRP was similar in SPF male and female mice. Conclusions Our data suggest that at the level of DRG neurons, the absence of gut microbiota does not predispose to visceral hypersensitivity. The intensity of DRG neuronal responses to capsaicin and the GPCR agonists-induced production of substance P are higher in male compared to female mice, in contrast to previously published studies in various models of acute and chronic pain. Further studies are thus needed to investigate the role of 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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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