The effects of fatigue and oxidation on contractile function of intact muscle fibers and myofibrils isolated from the mouse diaphragm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of repetitive stimulation and the oxidant H2O2 on fatigue of diaphragm intact fibers and in myofibrils measured with different Ca2+ concentrations. Intact fibers were isolated from mice diaphragm, and twitch and tetanic contractions (500 ms duration) were performed at different frequencies of stimulation ranging from 15 Hz to 150 Hz to establish a force-frequency relation before and after a fatigue and recovery protocol, without or after a treatment with H2O2. Fatigue was induced with isometric contractions (500 ms, 40 Hz) evoked every 0.8 seconds, with a total of 625 tetani. After the fatigue, the force recovery was followed by invoking tetanic contractions (500 ms, 40 Hz) every 1 min, with a total duration of 30 min. Individual myofibrils were also isolated from the mouse diaphragm and were tested for isometric contractions before and after treatment with H2O2 and NAC. In a second series of experiments, myofibrils were activated at different pCa (pCa = −log10 [Ca2+]), before and after H2O2 treatment. After 15 minutes of H2O2 treatment, the myofibrillar force was decreased to 54 ± 12% of its control, maximal value, and a result that was reversed by NAC treatment. The force was also decreased after myofibrils were treated with H2O2 and activated in pCa ranging between 4.5 and 5.7. These results suggest that fatigue in diaphragm intact fibers and at the myofibrils level is caused partially by oxidation of the contractile proteins that may be responsible for changing the force in various levels of Ca2+ activation.
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".