MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395084375 · doi:10.1016/j.vetimm.2024.110758

Resting and activated bovine neutrophils and eosinophils differ in their responses to adrenergic agonists

2024· article· en· W4395084375 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela Howell, Natasa Arsic, Philip Griebel

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Immunology and Immunopathology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanGlobal Institute for Water Security
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEosinophilBiologyStimulationZymosanAdrenergic receptorReceptorAgonistImmunologyImmune systemGranulocyteEndocrinologyInternal medicineInnate immune systemMedicineIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymorphonuclear cells (PMN) provide a rapid response to infection and tissue damage and stress can modify these critical innate immune defences. The study of adrenergic receptor (AR) expression and function in bovine PMNs is limited but both neutrophils and eosinophils express numerous AR genes but differ significantly in their expression of individual AR genes. A flow cytometric technique was developed to differentiate between bovine neutrophils and eosinophils so both neutrophil and eosinophil responses to adrenergic agonists could be analysed. Neutrophils and eosinophils displayed significantly different changes in CD11b, L-selectin, and CD44 expression when activated by bovine serum opsonized zymosan and recombinant bovine interferon gamma. The responses of activated and resting neutrophils and eosinophils were then compared following stimulation with endogenous adrenergic agonists, epinephrine (E) norepinephrine (NE), and synthetic agonists targeting α1-, α2-, or β-ARs. Both resting and activated neutrophils and eosinophils displayed differences in iROS, CD44, and L-selectin expression following stimulation with E and NE. Resting neutrophils displayed pro-inflammatory responses to both E and NE, while resting eosinophils displayed a pro-inflammatory response to only NE. No single synthetic adrenergic agonist fully recapitulated responses observed with either E or NE and responses to adrenergic agonists were dose-dependent. In conclusion, bovine eosinophils and neutrophils responded to multiple adrenergic agonists by altering expression of proteins involved in immune surveillance and pro-inflammatory responses. Significant differences in neutrophil and eosinophil responses to adrenergic agonists are consistent with their differences in AR gene expression. This highlights the importance of analysing separately these two PMN subpopulations when investigating the effects of either endogenous or synthetic AR agonists.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary Immunology and ImmunopathologySame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207