Pulmonary Surfactant: A Mighty Thin Film
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary surfactant is a critical component of lung function in healthy individuals. It functions in part by lowering surface tension in the alveoli, thereby allowing for breathing with minimal effort. The prevailing thinking is that low surface tension is attained by a compression-driven squeeze-out of unsaturated phospholipids during exhalation, forming a film enriched in saturated phospholipids that achieves surface tensions close to zero. A thorough review of past and recent literature suggests that the compression-driven squeeze-out mechanism may be erroneous. Here, we posit that a surfactant film enriched in saturated lipids is formed shortly after birth by an adsorption-driven sorting process and that its composition does not change during normal breathing. We provide biophysical evidence for the rapid formation of an enriched film at high surfactant concentrations, facilitated by adsorption structures containing hydrophobic surfactant proteins. We examine biophysical evidence for and against the compression-driven squeeze-out mechanism and propose a new model for surfactant function. The proposed model is tested against existing physiological and pathophysiological evidence in neonatal and adult lungs, leading to ideas for biophysical research, that should be addressed to establish the physiological relevance of this new perspective on the function of the mighty thin film that surfactant provides.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".