DYSREGULATION OF LIPOLYSIS AND LIPID METABOLISM IN VISCERAL AND SUBCUTANEOUS ADIPOCYTES BY HIGH‐FAT DIET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the molecular mechanisms by which high‐fat diet (HFD) dysregulates lipolysis and lipid metabolism in mouse epididymal (visceral, VC) and inguinal (subcutaneous, SC) adipocytes. HFD feeding increased ATGL content and CGI‐58 expression, whereas HSL phosphorylation and perilipin content were reduced. This was accompanied by increased basal but blunted epinephrine‐stimulated lipolysis and increased DAG content in VC and SC adipocytes. In HFD VC adipocytes, activation of adenylyl cyclases by forskolin increased HSL phoshorylation and matched the lipolytic response of control VC cells. However, in HFD SC adipocytes, forskolin induced lipolysis without detectable HSL phosphorylation. This suggests activation of an alternative lipase in response to the HFD‐induced suppression of HSL phosphorylation/activation in VC and SC adipocytes. HFD also powerfully inhibited basal, epinephrine‐, and forskolin‐induced AMPK activation as well as the expression of PGC‐1α and PPARα, citrate synthase activity, and palmitate oxidation in both fat depots. In summary, defective adrenergic receptor signaling combined with up‐regulation of ATGL, and suppression of HSL and AMPK signaling mediate HFD‐induced dysregulation of lipolysis and lipid metabolism in VC and SC adipocytes.
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) | 0.001 | 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".