Modulation of mitochondrial biomarkers by intermittent hypobaric hypoxia and aerobic exercise after eccentric exercise in trained rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unaccustomed eccentric contractions induce muscle damage, calcium homeostasis disruption, and mitochondrial alterations. Since exercise and hypoxia are known to modulate mitochondrial function, we aimed to analyze the effects on eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage (EEIMD) in trained rats using 2 recovery protocols based on: (i) intermittent hypobaric hypoxia (IHH) and (ii) IHH followed by exercise. The expression of biomarkers related to mitochondrial biogenesis, dynamics, oxidative stress, and bioenergetics was evaluated. Soleus muscles were excised before (CTRL) and 1, 3, 7, and 14 days after an EEIMD protocol. The following treatments were applied 1 day after the EEIMD: passive normobaric recovery (PNR), 4 h daily exposure to passive IHH at 4000 m (PHR) or IHH exposure followed by aerobic exercise (AHR). Citrate synthase activity was reduced at 7 and 14 days after application of the EEIMD protocol. However, this reduction was attenuated in AHR rats at day 14. PGC-1α and Sirt3 and TOM20 levels had decreased after 1 and 3 days, but the AHR group exhibited increased expression of these proteins, as well as of Tfam, by the end of the protocol. Mfn2 greatly reduced during the first 72 h, but returned to basal levels passively. At day 14, AHR rats had higher levels of Mfn2, OPA1, and Drp1 than PNR animals. Both groups exposed to IHH showed a lower p66shc(ser36)/p66shc ratio than PNR animals, as well as higher complex IV subunit I and ANT levels. These results suggest that IHH positively modulates key mitochondrial aspects after EEIMD, especially when combined with aerobic exercise.
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) | 0.001 | 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".