Skeletal muscle mitochondrial and metabolic responses to a high-fat diet in female rats bred for high and low aerobic capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rats selected artificially to be low-capacity runners (LCR) possess a metabolic syndrome phenotype that is worsened by a high-fat diet (HFD), whereas rats selected to be high-capacity runners (HCR) are protected against HFD-induced obesity and insulin resistance. This study examined whether protection against, or susceptibility to, HFD-induced insulin resistance in the HCR-LCR strains is associated with contrasting metabolic adaptations in skeletal muscle. HCR and LCR rats (generation 20; n = 5-6; maximum running distance approximately 1800 m vs. approximately 350 m, respectively (p < 0.0001)) were divided into HFD (71.6% energy from fat) or normal chow (NC) (16.7% energy from fat) groups for 7 weeks (from 24 to 31 weeks of age). Skeletal muscle (red gastrocnemius) mitochondrial-fatty acid oxidation (FAO), mitochondrial-enzyme activity, mitochondrial-morphology, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma coactivator 1alpha (PGC-1alpha), and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor delta (PPARdelta) expression and insulin sensitivity (intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests) were measured. The HFD caused increased adiposity and reduced insulin sensitivity only in the LCR and not the HCR strain. Isolated mitochondria from the HCR skeletal muscle displayed a 2-fold-higher rate of FAO on NC, but both groups increased FAO following HFD. PGC-1alpha mRNA expression and superoxide dismutase activity were significantly reduced with the HFD in the LCR rats, but not in the HCR rats. PPARdelta expression did not differ between strains or dietary conditions. These results do not provide a clear connection between protection of insulin sensitivity and HFD-induced adaptive changes in mitochondrial function or transcriptional responses but do not dismiss the possibility that elevated mitochondrial FAO in the HCR may play a protective role.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".