Adaptive muscle plasticity of a remaining agonist following denervation of its close synergists in a model of complete spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complete spinal cord injury (SCI) alters the contractile properties of skeletal muscle, and although exercise can induce positive changes, it is unclear whether the remaining motor system can produce adaptive muscle plasticity in response to a subsequent peripheral nerve injury. To address this, the nerve supplying the lateral gastrocnemius (LG) and soleus muscles was sectioned unilaterally in four cats that had recovered hindlimb locomotion after spinal transection. In these spinal cats, kinematics and electromyography (EMG) were collected before and for 8 wk after denervation. Muscle histology was performed on LG and medial gastrocnemius (MG) bilaterally in four spinal and four intact cats. In spinal cats, cycle duration for the hindlimb ipsilateral or contralateral to the denervation could be significantly increased or decreased compared with predenervation values. Stance duration was generally increased and decreased for the contralateral and ipsilateral hindlimbs, respectively. The EMG amplitude of MG was significantly increased bilaterally after denervation and remained elevated 8 wk after denervation. In spinal cats the ipsilateral LG was significantly smaller than the contralateral LG, whereas the ipsilateral MG weighed significantly more than the contralateral MG. Histological characterizations revealed significantly larger fiber areas for type IIa fibers of the ipsilateral MG in three of four spinal cats. Microvascular density in the ipsilateral MG was significantly higher than in the contralateral MG. In intact cats, no differences were found for muscle weight, fiber area, or microvascular density between homologous muscles. Therefore, the remaining motor system after complete SCI retains the ability to produce adaptive muscle plasticity.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".