Estrogen Attenuation of Post‐Exercise Muscle Leukocyte Infiltration is not Receptor Mediated
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous work from our laboratory has demonstrated that estrogen will attenuate leukocyte infiltration into skeletal muscle following eccentric exercise. However the mechanisms by which estrogen exerts its effects are still uncertain. We investigated the role of estrogen receptors (ER) on muscle leukocyte infiltration following eccentric exercise through administration of the ER antagonist ICI 182,780 following downhill running to ovariectomized female rats with (E+) or without (E−) estrogen supplementation. At 24 and 48 h post‐exercise, soleus and white vastus muscles were removed and immunostained for HIS 48 (neutrophil) and ED1 (macrophage) positive cells. The increase in number of fibres positive for HIS 48 in soleus and positive for ED1 in the soleus and white vastus was significantly attenuated (p<0.05) in E+ relative to E− rats at 24 hours post‐exercise. E+ rats administered the ER agonist also had significantly (p<0.05) attenuated 24 h post‐exercise increases in HIS 48 and ED1 positive soleus and white vastus muscle fibres similar (p>0.05) to those without ER antagonist. This suggests that the ability of estrogen to attenuate post‐exercise leukocyte infiltration into skeletal muscle is not ER‐mediated. Supported by NSERC Canada
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".