ArticlePhysiological genomics2010
Vascular responses in aortic rings of a consomic rat panel derived from the Fawn Hooded Hypertensive strain.
Article in Physiological genomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Normalization of organ bath contraction data for tissue specimen size: does one approach fit all?Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Vascular Control Mechanisms Utilizing Video Microscopy of Isolated Resistance Arteries of Rats.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2017Article
- Reduced Dietary Selenium Impairs Vascular Function by Increasing Oxidative Stress in Sprague-Dawley Rat Aortas.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Article
- Strain survey and genetic analysis of vasoreactivity in mouse aorta.Physiological genomics · 2016Article
- Genetic Regulation of Endothelial Vasomotor Function.Frontiers in physiology · 2016Review
- The emerging role for rat models in gene discovery.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The present experiments, utilizing the high-throughput vascular protocol of PhysGen (Program for Genomic Applications) characterized the responses of aortic rings to vasoconstrictor (phenylephrine) and vasodilator (acetylcholine, sodium nitroprusside, and reduced tissue bath Po(2)) stimuli in consomic rat strains derived from a cross between the Fawn Hooded Hypertensive rat (FHH/EurMcwi) and the Brown Norway normotensive (BN/NHsdMcwi) rat. The effects of substituting individual BN chromosomes into the FHH genetic background were determined in animals that were maintained on a low-salt (0.4% NaCl) diet or switched to a high-salt (4% NaCl) diet for 3 wk. Sex-specific differences were evaluated in male and female consomic rats on similar dietary salt intake. Multiple chromosomes affected various vascular reactivity phenotypes in the FHH × BN consomic panel, and substantial salt-dependent changes in vascular reactivity and sex-specific differences in aortic reactivity were observed in individual consomic strains. However, compared with earlier studies of consomic rats derived from a cross between the BN rat and the Dahl salt-sensitive (SS) rat, only 3-7% of the vascular phenotypes were affected in a similar manner by substituting specific BN chromosomeschromosomes into the FHH genetic background versus the SS genetic background. The findings of the present study stress the potential value of consomic rat panels in gaining insight into genetic factors influencing vascular reactivity and suggest that the chromosomes that appear to be involved in the determination of aortic ring reactivity in different rodent models of hypertension are highly strain- and sex specific.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.