Pinacidil suppresses contractility and preserves energy but glibenclamide has no effect during muscle fatigue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of 10 microM glibenclamide, an ATP-sensitive K(+) (K(ATP)) channel blocker, and 100 microM pinacidil, a channel opener, were studied to determine how the K(ATP) channel affects mouse extensor digitorum longus (EDL) and soleus muscle during fatigue. Fatigue was elicited with 200-ms-long tetanic contractions every second. Glibenclamide did not affect rate and extent of fatigue, force recovery, or (86)Rb(+) fractional loss. The only effects of glibenclamide during fatigue were: an increase in resting tension (EDL and soleus), a depolarization of the cell membrane, a prolongation of the repolarization phase of action potential, and a greater ATP depletion in soleus. Pinacidil, on the other hand, increased the rate but not the extent of fatigue, abolished the normal increase in resting tension during fatigue, enhanced force recovery, and increased (86)Rb(+) fractional loss in both the EDL and soleus. During fatigue, the decreases in ATP and phosphocreatine of soleus muscle were less in the presence of pinacidil. The glibenclamide effects suggest that fatigue, elicited with intermittent contractions, activates few K(ATP) channels that affect resting tension and membrane potentials but not tetanic force, whereas opening the channel with pinacidil causes a faster decrease in tetanic force, improves force recovery, and helps in preserving energy.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".