Supplementation with α-Lipoic Acid, CoQ10, and Vitamin E Augments Running Performance and Mitochondrial Function in Female Mice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antioxidant supplements are widely consumed by the general public; however, their effects of on exercise performance are controversial. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of an antioxidant cocktail (α-lipoic acid, vitamin E and coenzyme Q10) on exercise performance, muscle function and training adaptations in mice. C57Bl/J6 mice were placed on antioxidant supplement or placebo-control diets (n = 36/group) and divided into trained (8 wks treadmill running) (n = 12/group) and untrained groups (n = 24/group). Antioxidant supplementation had no effect on the running performance of trained mice nor did it affect training adaptations; however, untrained female mice that received antioxidants performed significantly better than placebo-control mice (p ≤ 0.05). Furthermore, antioxidant-supplemented females (untrained) showed elevated respiratory capacity in freshly excised muscle fibers (quadriceps femoris) (p ≤ 0.05), reduced oxidative damage to muscle proteins (p ≤ 0.05), and increased expression of mitochondrial proteins (p ≤ 0.05) compared to placebo-controls. These changes were attributed to increased expression of proliferator-activated receptor gamma coactivator 1α (PGC-1α) (p ≤ 0.05) via activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) (p ≤ 0.05) by antioxidant supplementation. Overall, these results indicate that this antioxidant supplement exerts gender specific effects; augmenting performance and mitochondrial function in untrained females, but does not attenuate training adaptations.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it