Actions of putative chloride channel blocking agents on canine lower esophageal sphincter (LES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Niflumic acid (NA), a putative Cl-channel blocker, has provided pharmacological evidence that Cl-channel closures mediate hyperpolarization caused by NO in gastrointestinal smooth muscle. However, NA caused concentration- dependent relaxation of canine lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and failed to inhibit NO-mediated relaxations. DIDS also did not inhibit NO-mediated relaxations, but did abolish them when present with 20 mM TEA (tetraethyl ammonium ion), which was also ineffective alone. TEA reversed NA-induced relaxations, but with NA it did not inhibit NO-mediated relaxations. We investigated the modes of action of these agents further. Neither nerve-function block nor block of NOS activity affected the inhibition of LES tone by NA. In patch-clamp studies, NA increased outward currents from 30 to + 90 mV when [Ca2+]pipettewas 50 nM. This was prevented by 20 mM TEA, but not by prior inhibition of NOS. At 200 nM [Ca2+]pipette, TEA markedly reduced outward currents, but did not prevent the increase from subsequent NA. In contrast, under similar conditions, application of DIDS after 20 mM TEA further reduced outward currents. When the patch pipette contained CsCl and TEA to block K+currents, NA had no significant effect on currents between 50 and +90 mV. Thus, NA acted by opening K+channels: some TEA-sensitive and some not. It had no detectable effect on currents when K+channels were blocked. We conclude that NA is an unreliable pharmacological tool to evaluate Cl-channel contributions to smooth muscle function. DIDS did not open K+channels. Decreases in outward currents from DIDS may result from inhibition of K+currents or currents carried by Clat depolarized membrane potentials.Key words: DIDS, niflumic acid, NO actions, smooth muscle.
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".