MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4232710329 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.5.a469

Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in the Rostral Ventrolateral Medulla of Hindlimb Unloaded Rats

2007· article· en· W4232710329 on OpenAlexaff
Terese M. Zidon, C. Michael Foley, Angelina Y. Fong, Cheryl M. Heesch, Patrick J. Mueller, Luise King, Stacy B Bruno, Eileen M. Hasser

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRostral ventrolateral medullaInternal medicineEndocrinologyBaroreflexMedulla oblongataNitric oxide synthaseBrainstemChemistryHindlimbNitric oxideMedicineBlood pressureCentral nervous systemHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prolonged periods of bed rest or spaceflight result in cardiovascular deconditioning and a predisposition for orthostatic intolerance. Hindlimb unloaded (HU) rats are an animal model of deconditioning and exhibit blunted baroreflex sympathoexcitation. The rostral ventrolateral medulla (RVLM) is important for maintaining arterial pressure and baroreflex function. GABAergic inhibition in the RVLM is increased in HU rats. Nitric oxide (NO) is an important neuromodulator shown to increase GABA inhibition and may contribute to the enhanced GABAergic inhibition in the RVLM following HU. We hypothesized that 14 days of HU increases neuronal NO synthase (nNOS) in the RVLM. The unilateral distribution of nNOS was examined using immunohistochemistry in brainstem sections (30μm) from male Sprague Dawley (300–350g) control (n=4) and HU (n=4) rats at three rostral‐caudal levels of the RVLM (relative to bregma: −11.8, −12.3 and −12.9). The number of nNOS positive cells was not different between control and HU rats respectively (59.5 ± 13.7 vs 61.0 ± 8.0) with similar NOS expression at each level of the RVLM (rostral: 21.8 ± 1.4 vs. 24.8 ± 4.1; middle: 23.8 ± 6.8 vs. 17.5 ± 1.9; and caudal: 14.0 ± 2.3 vs 18.8 ± 1.4). The preliminary data suggest that nNOS in the RVLM is unchanged following 14 days of HU. Thus, HU does not appear to alter the number or distribution of nNOS containing neurons in the RVLM. (HL55306; NNA04CC626)

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep→French-language works237,207→