Sodium nitrate supplementation alters mitochondrial H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> emission but does not improve mitochondrial oxidative metabolism in the heart of healthy rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Supplementation with dietary inorganic nitrate ([Formula: see text]) is increasingly recognized to confer cardioprotective effects in both healthy and clinical populations. While the mechanism(s) remains ambiguous, in skeletal muscle oral consumption of NaNO3 has been shown to improve mitochondrial efficiency. Whether NaNO3 has similar effects on mitochondria within the heart is unknown. Therefore, we comprehensively investigated the effect of NaNO3 supplementation on in vivo left ventricular (LV) function and mitochondrial bioenergetics. Healthy male Sprague-Dawley rats were supplemented with NaNO3 (1 g/l) in their drinking water for 7 days. Echocardiography and invasive hemodynamics were used to assess LV morphology and function. Blood pressure (BP) was measured by tail-cuff and invasive hemodynamics. Mitochondrial bioenergetics were measured in LV isolated mitochondria and permeabilized muscle fibers by high-resolution respirometry and fluorometry. Nitrate decreased ( P < 0.05) BP, LV end-diastolic pressure, and maximal LV pressure. Rates of LV relaxation (when normalized to mean arterial pressure) tended ( P = 0.13) to be higher with nitrate supplementation. However, nitrate did not alter LV mitochondrial respiration, coupling efficiency, or oxygen affinity in isolated mitochondria or permeabilized muscle fibers. In contrast, nitrate increased ( P < 0.05) the propensity for mitochondrial H2O2 emission in the absence of changes in cellular redox state and decreased the sensitivity of mitochondria to ADP (apparent Km). These results add to the therapeutic potential of nitrate supplementation in cardiovascular diseases and suggest that nitrate may confer these beneficial effects via mitochondrial redox signaling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".