MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4139898: A Non-invasive <i>In Vivo</i> Experimental Model of Heart Failure Using Optogenetic Tachypacing in Larval Zebrafish

2024· article· en· W4404363689 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Savoie, Ahmed Ramadan, Matthew R. Stoyek, Alex Quinn

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOptogeneticsZebrafishIn vivoHeart failureAnimal modelRat modelAnatomyCardiologyNeuroscienceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tachycardia can drive heart failure (HF). Traditionally, this is experimentally modeled using an implantable pacemaker, an invasive, technically demanding, and low-throughput methodology. Genetically-expressed light-activated ion channels (‘optogenetics’) provide an alternative approach for in vivo cardiac stimulation, which if applied in transparent zebrafish embryos, may be used for non-invasive, cost-effective, high-throughput HF and drug screening studies. Objective: Establish a non-invasive in vivo experimental model of HF using optogenetic tachypacing in larval zebrafish. Methods: Larval zebrafish expressing cation-nonspecific channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2), chloride-specific anion channelrhodopsin-1 (ACR1), or green fluorescent protein (GFP, as a light-exposed, non-paced control) in cardiomyocytes were exposed to intermittent tachypacing (15s on, 15s off) by programmed light pulses from 2-7 days post fertilization (dpf). At 7 dpf: (i) in vivo atrial and ventricular mechanical function was assessed by end-diastolic area (EDA), end-systolic area (ESA), and ejection fraction (EF) with video microscopy; (ii) cardiac structure was measured by atrial and ventricular area in fixed larvae with fluorescent imaging; and (iii) gene expression of cardiac-specific HF biomarkers (atrial and brain natriuretic peptide [ anp , bnp ], atrial- and ventricular-specific myosin heavy chain-a and -b [ myh6 , myh7 ], and a-smooth muscle actin [ acta2 ]) was quantified by qPCR. Values across groups were compared by one-way ANOVA, with Šídák post hoc tests. Results: In vivo , atrial and ventricular EDA were greater in ChR2 (+191%, p <0.0001; +66%, p <0.0001) and ACR1 (+58%, p =0.005; +40%, p =0.0004) hearts compared to control, as was ESA (ChR2: +245%, p <0.0001; +67%, p <0.0001 and ACR1: +89%, p <0.0001; +53%, p <0.0001). Atrial EF was lower in ChR2 (-26%, p =0.0006) and ACR1 (-26%, p =0.0032) hearts, while ventricular EF was unchanged. Atrial and ventricular area were also greater in fixed ChR2 hearts (+191%, p <0.0001; +35%, p =0.0005), while only atrial area was greater in ACR1 hearts (+55%, p =0.0236). Expression of anp , bnp , and myh6 were greater in both ChR2 (11x, 22x , 58x; p <0.05 for each) and ACR1 (6x, 4x, 15x; p <0.05 for each) hearts. Conclusion: Intermittent optogenetic-tachypacing with either ChR2 or ACR1 induces HF in larval zebrafish, which may represent novel experimental models for insight into HF mechanisms and as pre-clinical tools for the development of new HF therapies.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→