Inhibition of Nitric Oxide Synthesis Eliminates Interstitial Adenosine Production During Systemic Hypoxia in Rat Skeletal Muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between nitric oxide (NO) synthesis and adenosine (Ado) production in the interstitial space of skeletal muscle during systemic hypoxia. In order to accomplish this, microdialysis fibers were inserted into the hindlimb of anesthetized rats and perfused with the following solutions; 1) Ringer's (control), 20 mM SNP (NO donor), 10 mM L‐NAME (NO inhibitor), 500 μM AOPCP (Ado inhibitor) and 10 mM L‐NAME+ 500 μM AOPCP during baseline (100% O 2 ) and hypoxia (10.5% O 2 ). Ringer's perfusion did not result in any changes in interstitial NO concentrations during either baseline or hypoxia. The perfusion of L‐NAME, AOPCP and L‐NAME+AOPCP inhibited (p<0.05) NO production below detection limits, while SNP perfusion increased interstitial NO levels beyond detection limits throughout the experiment. During Ringer's perfusion, interstitial Ado concentrations were increased (p<0.05) during hypoxia (0.07±0.01) and decreased (P<0.05) during recovery (0.05±0.01 μM) as compared to baseline (0.04±0.01 μM). The perfusion of L‐NAME, AOPCP and L‐NAME+AOPCP all inhibited adenosine production to the point where interstitial Ado levels were below detection limits (p<0.05) during baseline, hypoxia and recovery. Surprisingly, the perfusion of SNP also dramatically decreased (p<0.05) the interstitial adenosine concentrations below detectable limits during hypoxia (undetectable) and recovery as compared to baseline. These data demonstrate that interstitial Ado production is very closely linked to NO availability and even under conditions when interstitial Ado production is stimulated (hypoxia), blocking NO availability completely eliminates all interstitial Ado production. These data further indicate that interstitial Ado production is tightly regulated within a narrow range of NO concentrations and a static pool of NO is required for normal interstitial Ado production. Support or Funding Information Supported by NSERC This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".