MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Glucose metabolism in perfused mouse hearts overexpressing human GLUT-4 glucose transporter

2001· article· en· W2338467026 on OpenAlexaff
Darrell D. Belke, Terje S. Larsen, E. Michael Gibbs, David L. Severson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternal medicineGlycolysisEndocrinologyGlucose transporterGlycogenInsulinGlucose uptakeCarbohydrate metabolismGlycogen synthaseBasal (medicine)PerfusionMetabolismBiologyGenetically modified mouseChemistryTransgeneMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glucose and fatty acid metabolism was assessed in isolated working hearts from control C57BL/KsJ-m+/+db mice and transgenic mice overexpressing the human GLUT-4 glucose transporter (db/+-hGLUT-4). Heart rate, coronary flow, cardiac output, and cardiac power did not differ between control hearts and hearts overexpressing GLUT-4. Hearts overexpressing GLUT-4 had significantly higher rates of glucose uptake and glycolysis and higher levels of glycogen after perfusion than control hearts, but rates of glucose and palmitate oxidation were not different. Insulin (1 mU/ml) significantly increased glycogen levels in both groups. Insulin increased glycolysis in control hearts but not in GLUT-4 hearts, whereas glucose oxidation was increased by insulin in both groups. Therefore, GLUT-4 overexpression increases glycolysis, but not glucose oxidation, in the heart. Although control hearts responded to insulin with increased rates of glycolysis, the enhanced entry of glucose in the GLUT-4 hearts was already sufficient to maximally activate glycolysis under basal conditions such that insulin could not further stimulate the glycolytic rate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations47
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and MetabolismSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207