Effect of duration of ischemia on myocardial proteome in ischemia/reperfusion injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is a serious problem resulting from clinical setting of coronary revascularization. Despite extensive studies on I/R injury, the molecular bases of cardiac dysfunction caused by I/R are still unknown, but are likely to result from alterations in protein expression. Isolated rat hearts were subjected to 15-30 min of no-flow ischemia without (Ischemia protocol) or with 30 min of reperfusion (I/R protocol). 2-DE analysis of heart proteins from both experimental protocols showed wide-ranging changes in protein levels. In the Ischemia protocol, 39 protein spots were changed in ischemic groups and those changes correlated with duration of ischemia. Ninety percent of the affected proteins were increased. In contrast to increased protein levels, the total messenger RNA (mRNA) level decreased approximately two fold. Compared to the Ischemia protocol, changes in protein levels in the I/R protocol did not correlate with the duration of ischemia and the degree of recovery of mechanical function. The decrease of affected protein from I/R protocol was associated with the increase in total protein level in reperfusate. Our studies show that the protein increase is correlated with the mechanical function of the I/R hearts and the increase is not likely associated with an increase in 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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".