Differential effects of repetitive activity on sarcoplasmic reticulum responses in rat muscles of different oxidative potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the hypothesis that muscles of different oxidative potential would display differences in sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) Ca2+ handling responses to repetitive contractile activity and recovery. Repetitive activity was induced in two muscles of high oxidative potential, namely, soleus (SOL) and red gastrocnemius (RG), and in white gastrocnemius (WG), a muscle of low oxidative potential, by stimulation in adult male rats. Measurements of SR properties, performed in crude homogenates, were made on control and stimulated muscles at the start of recovery (R0) and at 25 min of recovery (R25). Maximal Ca2+-ATPase activity (Vmax, micromol x g protein(-1) x min(-1)) at R0 was lower in stimulated SOL (105 +/- 9 vs. 135 +/- 7) and RG (269 +/- 22 vs. 317 +/- 26) and higher (P < 0.05) in WG (795 +/- 32 vs. 708 +/- 34). At R25, Vmax remained lower (P < 0.05) in SOL and RG but recovered in WG. Ca2+ uptake, measured at 2,000 nM, was depressed (P < 0.05) in SOL and RG by 34 and 13%, respectively, in stimulated muscles at R0 and remained depressed (P < 0.05) at R25. In contrast, Ca2+ uptake was elevated (P < 0.05) in stimulated WG at R0 by 9% and remained elevated (P < 0.05) at R25. Ca2+ release, unaltered in SOL and RG at both R0 and R25, was increased (P < 0.05) in stimulated WG at both R0 and R25. We conclude that SR Ca2+-handling responses to repetitive contractile activity and recovery are related to the oxidative potential of 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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".