Vitamin E and vitamin C do not reduce insulin sensitivity but inhibit mitochondrial protein expression in exercising obese rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controversy exists as to whether supplementation with the antioxidants vitamin E and vitamin C blocks adaptation to exercise. Exercise is a first-line means to treat obesity and its complications. While diet-induced obesity alters mitochondrial function and induces insulin resistance (IR), no data exist as to whether supplementation with vitamin E and vitamin C modify responses to exercise in pre-existing obesity. We tested the hypothesis that dietary supplementation with vitamin E (0.4 g α-tocopherol acetate/kg) and vitamin C (0.5 g/kg) blocks exercise-induced improvements on IR and mitochondrial content in obese rats maintained on a high-fat (45% fat energy (en)) diet. Diet-induced obese, sedentary rats had a 2-fold higher homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and larger insulin area under the curve following glucose tolerances test than rats fed a low-fat (10% fat en) diet. Exercising (12 weeks at 5 times per week in a motorized wheel) of obese rats normalized IR indices, an effect not modified by vitamin E and vitamin C. Vitamin E and vitamin C supplementation with exercise elevated mtDNA content in adipose and skeletal muscle to a greater extent (20%) than exercise alone in a depot-specific manner. On the other hand, vitamin C and vitamin E decreased exercise-induced increases in mitochondrial protein content for complex I (40%) and nicotinamide nucleotide transhydrogenase (35%) in a muscle-dependent manner. These data indicate that vitamin E and vitamin C supplementation in obese rodents does not modify exercise-induced improvements in insulin sensitivity but that changes in mitochondrial biogenesis and mitochondrial protein expression may be modified by antioxidant supplementation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".