Angiomotin p80/p130 ratio: a new indicator of exercise‐induced angiogenic activity in skeletal muscles from obese and non‐obese rats?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skeletal muscle capillarisation responds to physiological and pathological conditions with a remarkable plasticity. Angiomotin was recently identified as a new pro-angiogenic molecule. Angiomotin is expressed as two protein isoforms, p80 and p130. Whereas p80 stimulates endothelial cell migration and angiogenesis, p130 is rather characteristic of stabilized and matured vessels. To date, how angiomotin expression is physiologically regulated in vivo remains largely unknown. We thus investigated (1) whether angiomotin was physiologically expressed in skeletal muscle; (2) whether exercise training, known to stimulate muscle angiogenesis, affected angiomotin expression; and (3) whether such regulation was altered in obesity, a pathological situation often associated with an impaired angiogenic activity and some capillary rarefaction in skeletal muscle. Two models of obesity were used: a high fat diet regime and Zucker Diabetic Fatty rats (ZDF). Our results provide evidence that angiomotin was expressed both in capillaries and myofibres. In non-obese rats, the p80 isoform was increased in plantaris muscle in response to endurance training whereas p130 was unaffected. In obese animals, no change was observed for p80 whereas training significantly decreased p130 expression. Exercise training induced angiogenesis in plantaris from both obese and non-obese rats, possibly through the modulation of angiomotin level and its consequences on RhoA-ROCK signalling. In conclusion, any increase in p80 or decrease in p130, as respectively observed in non-obese and obese animals, led to an increased ratio between p80 and p130 isoforms. This increased angiomotin p80/p130 ratio might then directly reflect the enhanced angiogenic ability of skeletal muscle in response to exercise training.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".