Regulation of Skeletal Muscle Resistance Arteriolar Tone: Temporal Variability in Vascular Responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A full understanding of the integration of the mechanisms of vascular tone regulation requires an interrogation of the temporal behavior of arterioles across vasoactive challenges. Building on previous work, the purpose of the present study was to start to interrogate the temporal nature of arteriolar tone regulation with physiological stimuli. METHODS: We determined the response rate of ex vivo proximal and in situ distal resistance arterioles when challenged by one-, two-, and three-parameter combinations of five major physiological stimuli (norepinephrine, intravascular pressure, oxygen, adenosine [metabolism], and intralumenal flow). Predictive machine learning models determined which factors were most influential in controlling the rate of arteriolar responses. RESULTS: Results indicate that vascular response rate is dependent on the intensity of the stimulus used and can be severely hindered by altered environments, caused by application of secondary or tertiary stimuli. Advanced analytics suggest that adrenergic influences were dominant in predicting proximal arteriolar response rate compared to metabolic influences in distal arterioles. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the vascular response rate to physiologic stimuli can be strongly influenced by the local environment. Translating how these effects impact vascular networks is imperative for understanding how the microcirculation appropriately perfuses tissue across conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".