Astrocytes produce nitric oxide in response to cholinergic or glutamatergic stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the brain, it had been demonstrated that nitric oxide (NO) is produced in endothelial cells and neurons by endothelial (eNOS) and neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS), respectively. However, in astrocytes, the source of NO production remains uncertain. The objective of the present study is to determine the sources and activators of NO production in mouse cortical astrocytes. NOS subtypes were identified by immunocytochemistry and electron microscopy. Using cortical astrocytes in culture, NO production was evaluated using 4‐amino‐5‐methylamino‐2′,7′‐difluorofluorescein (DAF‐FM) and confocal microscopy. Elevations of NO were detected in response to a 5 min stimulation with acetylcholine, N‐Methyl‐D‐aspartic acid (NMDA) or trans‐1‐ aminocyclopentane‐1,3‐dicarboxylic acid (t‐ACPD). NO production by acetylcholine seems to be spatially restricted while NO production induced by glutamatergic stimulation is diffuse. These effects were blocked by the NOS competitive inhibitor L‐N‐Nitro‐ Arginine, thus confirming their specificity. Our results suggest that there are two different pathways for NO production in astrocytes, which could have physiological consequences for neuronal and vascular functions in the brain. Supported by NSERC
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".