MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

H <sub>1</sub> /H <sub>2</sub> Histamine Receptor Blockade Alters the Glutathione Redox Status in Skeletal Muscle Following a Bout of Prolonged Exercise

2019· article· en· W3174167099 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Patrick C. Turnbull, Helen E. Wallace, Laura R. Davidson, Erin M Samson, Amy PR Graham, Mackenzie CW. Bell, Karen Brebner, Christopher G. R. Perry, Daniel A. Kane

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsSkeletal muscleGlutathioneEndocrinologyInternal medicineChemistrySoleus muscleAntagonistHistamineOxidative stressMedicineReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of an acute bout of prolonged exercise on muscle include increases in oxidative metabolism and altered cellular redox environment. Histamine mediates many acute exercise responses, including sustained vasodilation and associated delivery of substrates to muscle. Previously, we demonstrated that H 1 and H 2 histamine receptor blockade with oral antihistamines resulted in a diminished capacity for mitochondrial H 2 O 2 emission in skeletal muscle following an acute bout of prolonged exercise. Here, we tested the hypothesis that along with diminishing mitochondrial H 2 O 2 emission, H 1 and H 2 histamine receptor blockade would attenuate exercise‐induced changes in skeletal muscle glutathione redox status. Adult male Wistar rats (83 ± 5.5 days old; 440.04 ± 40.70 g) were assigned to one of four groups ( n = 12/group): exercise, in the form of one hour of continuous treadmill running at 20 cm/sec (Group 1); mass‐specific oral gavage with H 1 antagonist fexofenadine (7.11 mg/kg) and H 2 antagonist ranitidine (3.95 mg/kg) one hour prior to the same exercise protocol (Group 2); a group receiving oral H 1 and H 2 antagonists, but not exercised (Group 3); and a control group, which received neither antihistamines nor exercise (Group 4). An hour post‐exercise, total, reduced (GSH) and oxidized glutathione (GSSG) were assessed in red gastrocnemius (mixed fiber types) and soleus (oxidative) skeletal muscles. Redox status was expressed as GSH/GSSG. While no changes were observed in total glutathione for any treatment in either muscle, in soleus, antihistamine treatment, but not exercise decreased GSH/GSSG (main effect; p &lt; 0.05). In red gastrocnemius, exercise, but not antihistamine treatment decreased GSH/GSSH (main effect; p &lt; 0.05). These observations trend with those of a blunted capacity for mitochondrial H 2 O 2 emission in skeletal muscle with antihistamine treatment and suggest an altered redox response to exercise following H 1 /H 2 histamine receptor blockade in soleus. Given the widespread and routine use of antihistamines, further research into the effects of these antagonists on redox status in muscle is warranted. Support or Funding Information Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation, Canada Foundation for Innovation. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicExercise and Physiological ResponsesFrench-language works237,207