Reversible temperature-dependent differences in brown adipose tissue respiration during torpor in a mammalian hibernator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although seasonal modifications of brown adipose tissue (BAT) in hibernators are well documented, we know little about functional regulation of BAT in different phases of hibernation. In the 13-lined ground squirrel, liver mitochondrial respiration is suppressed by up to 70% during torpor. This suppression is reversed during arousal and interbout euthermia (IBE), and corresponds with patterns of maximal activities of electron transport system (ETS) enzymes. Uncoupling of BAT mitochondria is controlled by free fatty acid release stimulated by sympathetic activation of adipocytes, so we hypothesized that further regulation at the level of the ETS would be of little advantage. As predicted, maximal ETS enzyme activities of isolated BAT mitochondria did not differ between torpor and IBE. In contrast to this pattern, respiration rates of mitochondria isolated from torpid individuals were suppressed by ~60% compared with rates from IBE individuals when measured at 37°C. At 10°C, however, mitochondrial respiration rates tended to be greater in torpor than IBE. As a result, the temperature sensitivity (Q10) of mitochondrial respiration was significantly lower in torpor (~1.4) than IBE (~2.4), perhaps facilitating energy savings during entrance into torpor and thermogenesis at low body temperatures. Despite the observed differences in isolated mitochondria, norepinephrine-stimulated respiration rates of isolated BAT adipocytes did not differ between torpor and IBE, perhaps because the adipocyte isolation requires lengthy incubation at 37°C, potentially reversing any changes that occur in torpor. Such changes may include remodeling of BAT mitochondrial membrane phospholipids, which could change in situ enzyme activities and temperature sensitivities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".