A comparison of fiber specific and whole muscle homogenate markers of muscle activation following HIT and END exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Muscle activation following a bout of high‐intensity interval training (HIT) and endurance exercise (END) was examined in recreationally active men (n=6; age, 19.3±1.4 yrs; VO 2peak , 51.9±5.1 ml/min/kg; WRpeak, 264.1±41.6 W). Muscle biopsies were obtained at rest and immediately following a bout of HIT (8 20s intervals, separated by 10s rest, at 170% WRpeak; 481.4±60.1 W) and END (30min of steady state cycling at 65% of WRpeak; 173.7±29.8 W). Bouts were performed a minimum of 1 week apart in random order. MHC expression was identified via immunofluorescent staining while glycogen content was determined via PAS staining. Changes in phosphorylated AMPK (p‐AMPK) and mTOR (p‐mTOR) were determined in whole muscle homogenates via western blotting. Changes in glycogen content were only examined in type I and IIA fibers as only 8 and 16 of 24 samples contained IIX and IIAX fibers, respectively. Significant (p<0.05) glycogen depletion was observed in both type I (HIT −55% END −42%) and IIA (HIT −49%; END −72%) fibers following both protocols but was greater (p<0.05) in type IIA fibers following END than HIT. Interestingly, whole muscle markers of activation, p‐AMPK and p‐mTOR were only elevated (p<0.01) following END (HIT: p‐AMPK, p=0.34; p‐mTOR, p=0.50). These data suggest that use of p‐AMPK and p‐mTOR as markers of whole muscle activation may not be appropriate following HIT. This research was supported by NSERC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".