MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1540790482 · doi:10.7457/cmep.v4i1

The influence of mechanical loading on skeletal muscle protein turnover

2015· article· en· W1540790482 on OpenAlexaff
Amy J. Hector, Chris McGlory, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkeletal musclemTORC1Muscle atrophyProtein turnoverMuscle massSarcopeniaAtrophyCell biologyBiologyDownregulation and upregulationNeuroscienceChemistryMedicineEndocrinologyInternal medicineProtein biosynthesisBiochemistrySignal transductionPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeletal muscle plays a fundamental role in human health and so understanding the biological processes that regulate skeletal muscle mass in health and disease is critical. We know that resistance exercise increases rates of muscle protein synthesis (MPS) in a mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1)-dependent manner. However, the exact molecule(s) that ‘sense’ mechanical loading and translate that signal to a biochemical event leading to upregulation of MPS remains elusive. Similarly, in response to periods of unloading there is a decrease in MPS and potentially a transient increase in muscle protein breakdown MPB, but the relative contribution of MPS and MPB to muscle atrophy remains unknown. The aim of this review is to briefly outline the molecular mechanisms that regulate skeletal muscle protein mass in response to both mechanical loading and unloading (disuse). We discuss recent developments in the field of molecular exercise biology as well as present a working hypothesis as to the physiological basis for muscle disuse atrophy.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→