MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164355388 · doi:10.1242/jeb.029058

Locomotor trade-offs in mice selectively bred for high voluntary wheel running

2009· article· en· W2164355388 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth M. Dlugosz, Mark A. Chappell, David McGillivray, Douglas A. Syme, Theodore Garland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSprintWheel runningHindlimbMuscle massTurnoverBiologyGastrocnemius muscleSkeletal muscleAnatomyAnimal scienceInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated sprint performance and running economy of a unique ;mini-muscle' phenotype that evolved in response to selection for high voluntary wheel running in laboratory mice (Mus domesticus). Mice from four replicate selected (S) lines run nearly three times as far per day as four control lines. The mini-muscle phenotype, resulting from an initially rare autosomal recessive allele, has been favoured by the selection protocol, becoming fixed in one of the two S lines in which it occurred. In homozygotes, hindlimb muscle mass is halved, mass-specific muscle oxidative capacity is doubled, and the medial gastrocnemius exhibits about half the mass-specific isotonic power, less than half the mass-specific cyclic work and power, but doubled fatigue resistance. We hypothesized that mini-muscle mice would have a lower whole-animal energy cost of transport (COT), resulting from lower costs of cycling their lighter limbs, and reduced sprint speed, from reduced maximal force production. We measured sprint speed on a racetrack and slopes (incremental COT, or iCOT) and intercepts of the metabolic rate versus speed relationship during voluntary wheel running in 10 mini-muscle and 20 normal S-line females. Mini-muscle mice ran faster and farther on wheels, but for less time per day. Mini-muscle mice had significantly lower sprint speeds, indicating a functional trade-off. However, contrary to predictions, mini-muscle mice had higher COT, mainly because of higher zero-speed intercepts and postural costs (intercept-resting metabolic rate). Thus, mice with altered limb morphology after intense selection for running long distances do not necessarily run more economically.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicGenetics and Physical PerformanceFrench-language works237,207