Sirtuin 1-mediated Effects of Exercise and Resveratrol on Mitochondrial Biogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of sirtuin 1 (SirT1) in exercise- and resveratrol (RSV)-induced skeletal muscle mitochondrial biogenesis. Using muscle-specific SirT1-deficient (KO) mice and a cell culture model of differentiated myotubes, we compared the treatment of resveratrol, an activator of SirT1, with that of exercise in inducing mitochondrial biogenesis. These experiments demonstrated that SirT1 plays a modest role in maintaining basal mitochondrial content and a larger role in preserving mitochondrial function. Furthermore, voluntary exercise and RSV treatment induced mitochondrial biogenesis in a SirT1-independent manner. However, when RSV and exercise were combined, a SirT1-dependent synergistic effect was evident, leading to enhanced translocation of PGC-1α and SirT1 to the nucleus and stimulation of mitochondrial biogenesis. Thus, the magnitude of the effect of RSV on muscle mitochondrial biogenesis is reliant on SirT1, as well as the cellular environment, such as that produced by repeated bouts of exercise. Background: SirT1 regulates mitochondrial biogenesis in various tissues. Results: Exercise combined with resveratrol has a SirT1-dependent synergistic effect on mitochondrial biogenesis, despite individual treatments being SirT1-independent. Conclusion: SirT1 is important for maintaining muscle mitochondrial content and function. Significance: The dependence of muscle mitochondrial biogenesis on SirT1 depends on the metabolic state of the muscle.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".