MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2152345719 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2014-0118

Hsp25 and Hsp72 content in rat skeletal muscle following controlled shortening and lengthening contractions

2014· article· en· W2152345719 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrew M. Holwerda, Marius Locke

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkeletal muscleTibialis anterior muscleH&E stainIn vivoWestern blotInternal medicineMuscle damageEndocrinologyChemistryMyocyteBiologyMuscle contractionAnatomyImmunohistochemistryAndrologyMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cytoprotective proteins, Hsp25 and Hsp72, are increased in skeletal muscle after nondamaging, shortening contractions, but the temporal pattern of expression and stimulatory mechanisms remain unclear. Thus, we sought to define the in vivo temporal patterns of expression for Hsp25 and Hsp72 after 2 opposing contractions types. To do this, male Sprague-Dawley rats had 1 tibialis anterior (TA) muscle electrically stimulated (5 sets of 20 repetitions) while being either forcibly lengthened (LC) or shortened (SC). At 2, 8, 24, 48, 72, or 168 h after the contractions both the stimulated and the nonstimulated (contra-lateral control) TA muscles were removed and processed to examine muscle damage (hemotoxylin and eosin staining) and Hsp content (Western blot analyses). Cross-sections from TA muscles subjected to LCs showed muscle fibre damage at 8 h and thereafter. In contrast, no muscle fibre damage was observed at any time point following SCs. When normalized to contra-lateral controls, Hsp25 and Hsp72 content were significantly (P < 0.01) increased at 24 h (3.1- and 3.8-fold, respectively) and thereafter. There were no significant increases in Hsp25 or Hsp72 content at any time point following SC. These data suggest that LCs, but not SCs, result in Hsp accumulation and that the fibre/cellular damage sustained from LCs may be the stimulus for elevating Hsp content.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism→Same topicExercise and Physiological Responses→French-language works237,207→