Adaptation to lengthening contractions is independent of voluntary muscle recruitment but relies on inflammation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lengthening contractions trigger an adaptive response decreasing the susceptibility to exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). We hypothesized that 1) this adaptation can be observed when voluntary muscle recruitment is bypassed and 2) inflammation repression lessens the adaptive response. Rat ankle dorsiflexors were submitted to two bouts of elicited lengthening contractions 14 days apart; in vitro force production and macrophage concentrations were obtained before and 2 days after each bout in rats treated or not for 2 or 7 days with diclofenac. The first bout caused a 45% force deficit in the placebo group vs. 25% in the diclofenac group, whereas the ED1+ macrophage concentration increased by 10- and 5-fold, respectively. After the second bout, only diclofenac-treated rats (2 or 7 days) presented significant force deficits and increases in ED1+ and ED2+ macrophage concentrations, but this was more pronounced in the 7-day group. We conclude that adaptation to lengthening contractions does not depend on neural components but is likely mediated by strengthening of muscle structural/cellular elements and that inflammation is important for this process.
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) | 0.001 | 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".