Long‐chain fatty acid uptake by skeletal muscle is impaired in homozygous, but not heterozygous, heart‐type‐FABP null mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies with cardiac myocytes from homozygous heart-type fatty acid (FA)-binding protein (H-FABP) -/- mice have indicated that this intracellular receptor protein for long-chain FA is involved in the cellular uptake of these substrates. Based on the knowledge that muscle FA uptake is a process highly sensitive to regulation by hormonal and mechanical stimuli, we studied whether H-FABP would play a role in this regulation. A suitable model system to answer this question is provided by H-FABP +/- mice, because in hindlimb muscles the content of H-FABP was measured to be 34% compared to wild-type mice. In these H-FABP +/- skeletal muscles, just as in H-FABP -/- muscles, contents of FA transporters, i.e., 43-kDa FABPpm and 88-kDa FAT/CD36, were similar compared to wild-type muscles, excluding possible compensatory mechanisms at the sarcolemmal level. Palmitate uptake rates were measured in giant vesicles prepared from hindlimb muscles of H-FABP -/-, H-FABP +/-, and H-FABP +/+ mice. For comparison, giant vesicles were isolated from liver, the tissue of which expresses a distinct type of FABP (i.e., L-FABP). Whereas in H-FABP -/- skeletal muscle FA uptake was reduced by 42-45%, FA uptake by H-FABP +/- skeletal muscle was not different from that in wild-type mice. In contrast, in liver from H-FABP -/- and from H-FABP +/- mice, FA uptake was not altered compared to wild-type animals, indicating that changes in FA uptake are restricted to H-FABP expressing tissues. It is concluded that H-FABP plays an important, yet merely permissive, role in FA uptake into muscle tissues.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".