Differences in Mitochondrial Coupling Reveal a Novel Signature of Mitohormesis in Muscle of Healthy Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: [P/O]) is associated with sedentariness and insulin resistance. Interpreting the physiological relevance of P/O measured in vitro is challenging. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate muscle mitochondrial function and associated transcriptional profiles in nonobese healthy individuals distinguished by their in vivo P/O. DESIGN: Individuals from an ancillary study of Comprehensive Assessment of Long-term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy phase 2 were assessed at baseline. SETTING: The study was performed at Pennington Biomedical Research Center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-seven (18 males, 26-50 y of age) sedentary, healthy nonobese individuals were divided into 2 groups based on their in vivo P/O. INTERVENTION: P-magnetic resonance spectroscopy and optical spectroscopy were measured. A muscle biopsy was performed to measure fiber type, transcriptional profiling (microarray), and protein expressions. RESULTS: No differences in body composition, peak aerobic capacity, type I fiber content, or mitochondrial DNA copy number were observed between the 2 groups. Compared with the uncoupled group (lower P/O), the coupled group (higher P/O) had higher rates of maximal ATP synthetic capacity (maximal ATP synthetic capacity, P < .01). Transcriptomics analyses revealed higher expressions of genes involved in mitochondrial remodeling and the oxidative stress response in the coupled group. A trend for higher mitonuclear protein imbalance (P = .06) and an elevated mitochondrial unfolded protein response (heat shock protein 60 protein; P = .004) were also identified in the coupled group. CONCLUSIONS: Higher muscle mitochondrial coupling is accompanied by an overall elevation in mitochondrial function, a novel transcriptional signature of oxidative stress and mitochondrial remodeling and indications of an mitochondrial unfolded protein response.
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".