MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

EFFECTS OF DIETARY MANIPULATION ON MUSCLE GLYCOGEN AND SARCOPLASMIC RETICULUM FUNCTION DURING PROLONGED EXERCISE

2001· article· en· W2094223274 on OpenAlexaffabout
Helen Kollias, Todd A. Duhamel, A. Russell Tupling, S Sandiford, Jonathan D. Schertzer, H Green

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycogenInternal medicineEndocrinologyChemistryEndoplasmic reticulumCarbohydrateMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that exercise performed during low glycogen levels in associated with an increased depression in sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) function. To investigate this hypothesis, untrained males (5) and females (5), with a peak aerobic power (VO2 peak) of 3.5 ± 0.1 and 2.4 ± 0.1 L/min, respectively ( ± SE), cycled (65% VO2 peak), both while on a low carbohydrate (LO CHO) (23 ± 0.5% of energy from CHO) and normal diet (Normal CHO) (53 ± 2.2% of energy from CHO) for 4 days following glycogen depleting exercise. Resting muscle glycogen contents in vastus lateralis (378 ± 12 vs 259 ± 8 glucosyl units kg dry wt−1) were higher (p < 0.05) and times to fatigue (110 ± 37 vs 85 ± 24 min) were longer with Normal CHO. Maximal Ca2+-ATPase activities in homogenates, although higher (P < 0.05) at rest in LO CHO (131 ± 6 vs 119 ± 5 μmol.min g protein −1) were not different at fatigue. Homogenate based Ca2+-uptake, (μmol.min−1-1.g protein) were similar between diets at rest (351 ± 44 vs 369 ± 49). but decreased more rapidly (P < 0.05) on LO CHO compared to Normal CHO (304 ± 44 vs 369 ± 169 ± 29). These results demonstrate that the effects of dietary manipulation on SR function is specific to both the property measured (Ca2+-ATPase activity vs Ca2+-uptake) and the condition (rest vs exercise). Supported by NSERC (Canada)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→