Abundance and subcellular distribution of MCT1 and MCT4 in heart and fast-twitch skeletal muscles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The expression of two monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) was examined in muscle and heart. MCT1 and MCT4 proteins are coexpressed in rat skeletal muscles, but only MCT1 is expressed in rat hearts. Among six rat fast-twitch muscles (red and white gastrocnemius, plantaris, extensor digitorum longus, red and white tibialis anterior) there was an inverse relationship between MCT1 and MCT4 (r = -0.94). MCT1 protein was correlated with MCT1 mRNA (r = 0.94). There was no relationship between MCT4 mRNA and MCT4 protein. MCT1 (r = -0.97) and MCT4 (r = 0.88) protein contents were correlated with percent fast-twitch glycolytic fiber. When normalized for their mRNAs, MCT1 but not MCT4 was still correlated with the percent fast-twitch glycolytic fiber composition of rat muscles (r = -0.98). MCT1 and MCT4 were also measured in plasma membranes (PM), triads (TR), T tubules (TT), sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR), and intracellular membranes (IM). There was an intracellular pool of MCT4 but not of MCT1. The MCT1 subcellular distribution was as follows: PM (100%) > TR (31.6%) > SR (15%) = TT (14%) > IM (1.7%). The MCT4 subcellular distribution was considerably different [PM (100%) > TR (66.5%) > TT (36%) = SR (43%) > IM (24%)]. These studies have shown that 1) the mechanisms regulating the expression of MCT1 (transcriptional and posttranscriptional) and MCT4 (posttranscriptional) are different and 2) differences in MCT1 and MCT4 expression among muscles, as well as in their subcellular locations, suggest that they may have different roles in 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".