MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

ATP Excitation of the PreBötzinger Complex and Inspiratory Neurons <i>in vitro</i> is Mediated in Part via a PLC/IP <sub>3</sub> ‐mediated increase In [Ca <sup>2+</sup> ] <sub>i</sub>

2016· article· en· W4389027260 on OpenAlexafffund
Yong Zhang, Alexander V. Gourine, Sergey Kasparov, Tucaauê Alvares, Gregory D. Funk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsPPADSBiophysicsPurinergic receptorPhospholipase CDepolarizationP2Y receptorGlutamate receptorBiologyCell biologyChemistryInternal medicineReceptorBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ventilatory response to hypoxia comprises an initial increase in ventilation followed by a secondary depression that can be life‐threatening in premature infants. ATP released within the ventral respiratory column, including the preBötzinger Complex (preBötC, critical site for inspiratory rhythm generation), during hypoxia attenuates this depression. Astrocytes sense hypoxia via a mitochondrial mechanism that involves mitochondrial depolarization, free radical production, lipid peroxidation, phospholipase C (PLC) and inositol trisphosphate (IP 3 ) activation followed by an increase in intracellular Ca 2+ and vesicular ATP release. Our working hypothesis is that ATP released from preBötC astrocytes during hypoxia acts in an autocrine/paracrine manner to enhance gliotransmission and also excites local inspiratory neurons directly via a P2Y 1 receptor (R)‐dependent mechanism to increase inspiratory frequency (freq). Our first objective was to determine if the ATP excitation of inspiratory neurons includes an astrocytic glutamate component (i.e., do astrocytes release glutamate in response to P2Y 1 receptor activation?). Using 700 μm rhythmically‐active medullary slices, we obtained whole‐cell recordings from preBötC inspiratory neurons and compared neuronal ATP (5 mM) currents evoked before and after bath application of glutamate R antagonists AP5 (100 μM) and CNQX (10 μM) (in 0.5 μM TTX). AP5 and CNQX had no effect on ATP currents (n=8). Our second objective was to identify the signaling pathways through which ATP excites the preBötC network and neurons. Simultaneous application of the PLC blocker U73122 (20 μM) to the bath (20 μM) and into the preBötC (10 μM) via pressure injection shortened the duration of MRS2365 (100 μM)‐evoked frequency increase but had no effect on the peak frequency (n=9). 2‐APB (100 μM), an IP 3 R inhibitor, reduced the ATP‐evoked freq increase from 232.14 ± 39% to 147 ± 12% (n=5). In contrast, intracellular dialysis of U73122 (2 μM, n=6) and 2‐APB (50 μM, n=4) attenuated ATP‐evoked inward currents in inspiratory neurons by 50 ± 7% and 42 ± 17%, respectively. Bath application of U73122 had no effect on the ATP‐induced inward current (n=4), suggesting that bath‐applied U73122 does not access the neurons. Intracellular dialysis of sarco/endoplasmic reticulum Ca 2+ ‐ATPase (SERCA) blocker thapsigargin (4 μM, n=3) also attenuated the ATP‐induced inward currents in inspiratory neurons by 29.3 ± 1.03%. These data suggest that although the excitation of preBötC inspiratory neurons by ATP does not include a glial‐derived glutamatergic component, network excitation is brought about, at least in part, via activation in inspiratory neurons of a PLC, IP 3 receptor‐mediated release of Ca 2+ from intracellular stores. Support or Funding Information Supported by CIHR, AIHS, CFI, WCHRI and ALA.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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