Exercise in Pregnancy Increases Placental Angiogenin without Changes in Oxidative or Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite immense research highlighting maternal-fetal benefits of exercise during pregnancy, there remain concerns that exercise may undermine placental function. Although maternal exercise has demonstrated favorable aerobic conditioning responses in the mother, it is not known whether maternal exercise promotes increased angiogenesis in the placenta, perhaps at the expense of impaired endoplasmic reticulum (ER) homeostasis and/or oxidative stress. We investigated if a mild (30% heart rate reserve) and/or moderate (70% heart rate reserve) exercise regime in healthy pregnant women affected placental markers of angiogenesis, ER stress, and oxidative stress. We hypothesized that the improved aerobic conditioning of mothers who exercise is beneficial to enhance placental angiogenesis and normal maternal-fetal outcomes. METHODS: Placental tissues were collected within 1 h of delivery from a convenience sample of 29 healthy mothers of full-term infants. Twenty-one women participated in routine exercise from midgestation (16-20 wk) until term of either mild or moderate intensity, whereas eight sedentary women served as controls. RESULTS: No differences were identified between groups including gestational length, fetal-placental weight ratio, or APGAR scoring. All exercisers exhibited a significant 20-fold increase in the mRNA (as assessed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction) and a 10-fold increase in the protein expression of angiogenin (e.g., ANG1) in the placenta. However, in both exercising groups, no increases in placental markers (i.e., HIF1α, VEGF), ER stress (i.e., spliced XBP1, ATF4, ATF6, CHOP, and BAX), or oxidative stress (i.e., SOD1, SOD2) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study suggests that mild- and moderate-intensity exercise increases angiogenesis but does not increase placental oxidative or ER stress in healthy pregnancies, bolstering support for routine exercise as a part of standard care in pregnant women. Future studies are warranted to investigate the potential benefits of exercise on ANG1 in pathological pregnancies.
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".