Increased density of glucagon receptors in liver from endurance-trained rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The binding properties of glucagon receptors were determined in plasma membranes isolated from liver of untrained (n = 6) and swimming endurance-trained Sprague-Dawley male rats (n = 7; 3 h/day, 5 days/wk, for 8 wk). Plasma membranes were purified from liver by aqueous two-phase affinity partitioning, and saturation kinetics were obtained by incubation of plasma membranes (10 microg of proteins/150 microl) with (125)I-labeled glucagon at concentrations ranging from 0.15 to 3.0 nM for 30 min at 30 degrees C. Saturating curve analysis indicated no difference in the affinity of glucagon receptors (0.57 +/- 0.06 and 0.77 +/- 0.09 nM in untrained and trained groups, respectively) but a significant higher glucagon receptor density in liver from untrained vs. trained rats (3.09 +/- 0.12 vs. 4.28 +/- 0.19 pmol/mg proteins). These results suggest that the reported increase in liver glucagon sensitivity in endurance-trained subjects (Drouin R, Lavoie C, Bourque J, Ducros F, Poisson D, and Chiasson J-L. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 274: E23-E28, 1998) could be partly due to an increased glucagon receptor density in response to training.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".