Fat-1 Transgenic Mice Rich in Endogenous Omega-3 Fatty Acids are Protected from Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Cardiac malfunctions developing in result of sepsis are hard to treat so they eventually contribute to the increased mortality. Previous reports indicated for therapeutic potential of exogenous ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) in sepsis, but potential benefits of this compound on the malfunctional heart have not been explored yet. In the present study, we investigated whether the constantly elevated levels of endogenous ω-3 PUFA in transgenic fat-1 mice would alleviate the lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced cardiac failure and death. METHODS AND RESULTS: After both wild type (WT) and transgenic fat-1 mice were challenged with LPS, a Kaplan-Meier curve and echocardiography were performed to evaluate the survival rates and cardiac function. Proteomics analysis, RT-PCR, western blotting, immune-histochemistry, and transmission electron microscopy were further performed to investigate the underlying mechanisms. Results showed that transgenic fat-1 mice exhibited the significantly lower mortality after LPS challenge as compared with their WT counterparts (30% vs. 42.5%, P < 0.05). LPS injection consistently impaired the left ventricular contractile function and caused the cardiac injury in the wild type mice, but not significantly affected the fat-1 mice (P < 0.05). Proteomic analyses, ELISA, and immunohistochemistry further revealed that myocardium of the LPS-challenged fat-1 mice demonstrated the significantly lower levels of pro-inflammatory markers and ROS than WT mice. Meaningfully, the LPS-treated fat-1 mice also demonstrated a significantly higher levels of LC3 II/I and Atg7 expressions than the LPS-treated WT mice (P < 0.05), as well as displayed a selectively increased levels of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) γ and sirtuin (Sirt)-1 expression, associated with a parallel decrease in NFκB activation. CONCLUSIONS: The fat-1 mice were protected from the detrimental LPS-induced inflammation and oxidative stress, and exhibited enhancement of the autophagic flux activities, associating with the increased Sirt-1 and PPARγ signals.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".