↓ Skip to main content

Slowly Adapting Sensory Units Have More Receptors in Large Airways than in Small Airways in Rabbits

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Slowly Adapting Sensory Units Have More Receptors in Large Airways than in Small Airways in Rabbits
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Liu, Nana Song, Juan Guardiola, Jesse Roman, Jerry Yu

Abstract

Sensory units of pulmonary slowly adapting receptors (SARs) are more active in large airways than in small airways. However, there is no explanation for this phenomenon. Although sensory structures in large airways resemble those in small airways, they are bigger and more complex. Possibly, a larger receptor provides greater surface area for depolarization, and thus has a lower activating threshold and/or a higher sensitivity to stretch, leading to more nerve electrical activities. Recently, a single sensory unit has been reported to contain multiple receptors. Therefore, sensory units in large airways may contain more SARs, which may contribute to high activities. To test this hypothesis, we used a double staining technique to identify sensory receptor sizes. We labeled the sensory structure with Na(+)/K(+)-ATPase antibodies and the myelin sheath with myelin basic protein (MBP) antibodies. A SAR can be defined as the end formation beyond MBP labeling. Thus, we are able to compare sizes of sensory structures and SARs in large (trachea and bronchi) vs. small (bronchioles <500 μm in diameter) airways in the rabbit. We found that even though the sensory structure was bigger in large airways than in small airways (3340 ± 223 vs. 1168 ± 103 μm(2); P < 0.0001), there was no difference in receptor sizes (349 ± 14 vs. 326 ± 16 μm(2); > 0.05). However, the sensory structure contains more SARs in large airways than in small airways (9.6 ± 0.6 vs. 3.6 ± 0.3; P < 0.0001). Thus, our data support the hypothesis that greater numbers of SARs in sensory units of large airways may contribute to higher activities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 11%
Unknown 8 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 44%
Professor 2 22%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Engineering 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 December 2016.
All research outputs
#20,363,191
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,428
of 13,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#353,521
of 419,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#153
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.