Probable renin/prorrenin receptor fetal programming in the offspring from rats with pregnancy‐induced hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been described that fetal development is related to health state in adulthood. Barker et. al. have hypothesized that the prevalence of some diseases in adults (as hypertension) are related to intrauterine development, calling this phenomenon as “fetal programming”. Renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) participates in blood pressure regulation. This system has become more complex due to the finding of new components, such as the prorrenin/renin receptor (PRR), and it is described that some of them might be submitted to fetal programming. The aim of this work was to determine PRR expression in preterm (3 rd week of pregnancy), and 1, 4 and 12 weeks old offspring from normal pregnant and pregnancy‐induced hypertensive (PIH) rats. We measured blood pressure, length and body weight and determined PRR and PLZF expression by immunoblot on preterm (3 rd . week gestation),1, 4 and 12 weeks old groups. We found lower body weight and length in pups at the third week of gestation, and in 1 and 4 weeks old offspring from PIH. Blood pressure was higher in offspring from PIH rats at 12 weeks. We also found PRR and PLZF expression increased in those groups. These results suggest that PRR might be programmed in fetal stage, and could play a role in development of cardiovascular disease Support or Funding Information SIP 20150467 and 20160667
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".