MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insulin does not mediate the attenuation of fatigue associated with glucose infusion in rat plantaris muscle

2003· article· en· W2261275423 on OpenAlexaff
Antony D. Karelis, François Péronnet, Phillip F. Gardiner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternal medicineEndocrinologyInsulinPlantaris muscleHyperinsulinemiaChemistrySalineGlucose uptakeSkeletal muscleInsulin resistanceMedicineSoleus muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glucose infusion attenuates fatigue in rat plantaris muscle stimulated in situ, and this is associated with a better maintenance of electrical properties of the fiber membrane (Karelis AD, Péronnet F, and Gardiner PF. Exp Physiol 87: 585-592, 2002). The purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that elevated plasma insulin concentration due to glucose infusion ( approximately 900 pmol/l), rather than high plasma glucose concentration ( approximately 10-11 mmol/l), could be responsible for this phenomenon, because insulin has been shown to stimulate the Na+-K+ pump. The plantaris muscle was indirectly stimulated (50 Hz, for 200 ms, 5 V, every 2.7 s) via the sciatic nerve to perform concentric contractions for 60 min, while insulin (8 mU x kg-1x min-1: plasma insulin approximately 900 pmol/l) and glucose were infused to maintain plasma glucose concentration between 4 and 6 [6.2 +/- 0.4 mg x kg-1x min-1: hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic (HE)] or 10 and 12 mmol/l [21.7 +/- 1.1 mg. kg-1. min-1: hyperinsulinemic-hyperglycemic clamps (HH)] (6 rats/group). The reduction in submaximal dynamic force was significantly (P < 0.05) less with HH (-53%) than with HE and saline only (-66 and -70%, respectively). M-wave characteristics were also better maintained in the HH than in HE and control groups. These results demonstrate that the increase in insulin concentration is not responsible for the increase in muscle performance observed after the elevation of circulating glucose.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207