MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rat triple perfused in situ preparation for studying the interaction of carotid body, brainstem and spinal cord chemoreceptors

2016· article· en· W4389024362 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Richard J. A. Wilson, Arijit Roy, Mathias Dutschmann, Michael B. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryOntario Brain Institute
FundersNaval Medical Research Center—AsiaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsChemoreceptorBrainstemSpinal cordAnesthesiaPeripheral chemoreceptorsAnatomyMedicineCarotid bodyRetrograde perfusionHypoxia (environmental)PerfusionChemistryInternal medicineStimulationOxygen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary roles of the cardiorespiratory system are to oxygenate tissue and remove carbon dioxide. When blood oxygenation falls, breathing accelerates and the sympathetic nervous system kicks into high gear, increasing heart rate and blood pressure and redirecting oxygenated blood to vital organs including the brain. Without carotid body and aortic chemoreceptors the respiratory response to acute hypoxia is obliterated ‐‐ demonstrating that arterial chemoreceptors are responsible for the lion's share of the breathing responses ‐‐ but much of the cardiovascular response remains. Recently, using in vivo and in situ preparations, we discovered high fidelity oxygen chemoreceptors in the thoracic spinal cord that promote sympathetic activity and peripheral vasoconstriction (countering local hypoxia‐mediated vasodilation) during mild acute hypoxia. Remarkably, these spinal oxygen sensors (SOS) can respond to small increases or decreases in blood oxygen saturation without inputs from the aortic and carotid body chemoreceptors, vagus or brainstem. To determine how the SOS interact with carotid body and brainstem chemoreceptors, we have developed a novel triple‐perfused in situ preparation that allows separate perfusion of the carotid bodies, brainstem and thoracic spinal cord. This preparation is a descendent of the working heart brainstem preparation, being oxygenated with artificial saline and decerebrate, and thus limiting the use of anaesthetics to dissection. The carotid bodies and brainstem are perfused in the anterograde direction via cannula placed in the common carotid arteries and aortic arch, respectively. The descending aorta is ligated at its rostral end and cumulated at the level of the diaphragm, and perfused in a retrograde direction. Perfusate is equilibrated by gas mixtures produced by mass flow controllers, delivered via peristaltic pumps (perfusate to the brainstem and spinal cord are pressure feedback controlled), exits the preparation via cut blood vessels and is recirculated. Output variables are respiratory activity (recorded from phrenic nerve) and sympathetic activity (recorded from the sympathetic chain or the greater splanchnic nerve). To demonstrate the utility of this preparation and build on our previous research exploring the interaction of carotid body and brainstem respiratory chemoreflexes, we have tested whether SOS activation has an influence on respiratory responses to carotid body hypoxia via the sympathetic chain. Preliminary results suggest that spinal cord hypoxia does not affect respiratory responses to carotid body hypoxia, at least not via the superior cervical ganglia of the sympathetic chain. Future experiments will test how SOS, carotid body and brainstem chemoreceptors interact to mediate sympathetic responses to systemic hypoxia and CO 2 . Support or Funding Information This works was supported by operating grants from CIHR, Calgary SIDS Society (RJAW) and NMRCA (MD) and salary support from AIHS (RJAW) and ARC (MD).

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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