Effects of moderate intensity exercise training on the aortic eNOS‐Hsp90 interaction and insulin‐mediated vasorelaxation response in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise can improve insulin responsiveness and endothelial function in sedentary individuals, possibly through enhanced eNOS-Hsp90 interaction. In this study, it was hypothesized that moderate intensity exercise training would result in greater insulin-mediated vasorelaxation responses coupled with a greater eNOS-Hsp90 interaction. Twenty male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into exercise (E) and sedentary (S) groups. E rats walked on a treadmill at 15 m/min for 30 min, 4 d/wk, for 14–17 wks. Vasorelaxation responses to varying doses of insulin in excised aortic rings were analyzed. The eNOS-Hsp90 interaction was analyzed in aorta homogenates via co-immunoprecipitation. Insulin caused dose-dependent vasorelaxation responses which were significantly lower in the E group compared to the S group at several insulin concentrations (2.4±2.2% vs 12.6±3.2% at 1.5 IU/mL; 4.8±2.9% vs 17.6±3.9% at 2.25 IU/mL; 9.2±2.9% vs 24.7±4.4% at 3 IU/mL, respectively, p<0.05). The level of eNOS and Hsp90 protein content as well as their interaction (1.5±0.3 vs 2.3±0.4, respectively, p=0.09) were not significantly different between the E and S groups. In summary, moderate intensity exercise training resulted in decreased insulin-mediated vasorelaxation which was unlikely a consequence of changes in the eNOS-Hsp90 interaction. Supported by CIHR Grant #CCT- 83029.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".