The impact of feeding β<sub>2</sub>‐adrenergic agonists on rainbow trout muscle β<sub>2</sub>‐adrenoceptors and protein synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The β 2 ‐adrenergic agonists (β 2 ‐AAs) clenbuterol (CLEN) and ractopamine (RACT) were fed to rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss for 30–37 days and red and white muscle β 2 ‐adrenoceptor (β 2 ‐AR) binding characteristics and mRNA expression were assessed in parallel with fractional protein synthetic rates. Feeding CLEN or RACT had no significant effect on any body or physiological variables measured. There were no significant differences in the number of binding sites (B max ) while a significant increase in the K d was observed for the β‐ARs of red and white muscle membranes isolated from β 2 ‐AA‐fed rainbow trout. No change in β 2 ‐AR mRNA levels was observed with β 2 ‐AA feeding, implying that these β 2 ‐AAs do not act at the transcriptional level at least for the β 2 ‐AR. The β 2 ‐AA treatments, however, did significantly increase red and white muscle fractional protein synthesis rates in whole protein, myofibrillar protein and sarcoplasmic soluble protein fractions. Although not conclusive, this study supports a direct link between rainbow trout muscle β 2 ‐ARs and muscle protein synthesis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".