Effects of Creatine and Exercise on Skeletal Muscle of FRG1-Transgenic Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The FRG1-transgenic mouse displays muscle dysfunction and atrophy reminiscent of fascioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) and could provide a model to determine potential therapeutic interventions. METHODS: To determine if FRG1 mice benefit from treatments that improve muscle mass and function, mice were treated with creatine alone (Cr) or in combination with treadmill exercise (CrEX). RESULTS: The CrEx treatment increased quadriceps weight, mitochondrial content (cytochome c oxidase (COX) activity, COX subunit one and four protein), and induced greater improvements in grip strength and rotarod fall speed. While Cr increased COX subunits one and four protein, no effect on muscle mass or performance was found. Since Cr resulted in no functional improvements, the benefits of CrEx may be mediated by exercise; however, the potential synergistic action of the combined treatment cannot be excluded. CONCLUSION: Treatment with CrEx attenuates atrophy and muscle dysfunction associated with FRG1 overexpression. These data suggest exercise and creatine supplementation may benefit individuals with FSHD.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".