MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283365471 · doi:10.1101/2022.02.20.481208

Profiling skeletal muscle-derived secretome with differentiation and acute contractile activity

2022· preprint· en· W4283365471 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Bydak, Taiana M. Pierdoná, Samira Seif, Karim Sidhom, Hagar I. Labouta, Joseph W. Gordon, Ayesha Saleem

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicExtracellular vesicles in disease
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyogenesisC2C12MyocyteSkeletal muscleChemistryCell biologyIn vitroExosomeExtracellular vesiclesMolecular biologyAndrologyBiologyBiochemistryMicrovesiclesAnatomymicroRNAMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Extracellular vesicles (EVs) released from all cells, are essential to cellular communication, and contain biomolecular cargo that can affect recipient cell function. Studies on the effects of contractile activity (exercise) on EVs usually rely on plasma/serum-based assessments, which contain EVs from many different cells. To specifically characterize skeletal muscle-derived vesicles and the effect of acute contractile activity, we used an in vitro model where C2C12 mouse myoblasts were differentiated to form myotubes. EVs were isolated from conditioned media from muscle cells, pre-differentiation (myoblasts) and post-differentiation (myotubes), as well as from acutely stimulated myotubes (1hr @ 14V, C-Pace EM, IonOptix) using total exosome isolation reagent (TEI, ThermoFisher, referred to as extracellular particles [EPs]) and differential ultracentrifugation (dUC; EVs). Myotube-EPs (~98 nm) were 41% smaller than myoblast-EPs (~167 nm, p<0.001, N=8-10). Two-way ANOVA showed a significant main effect for size distribution of myotube vs . myoblast-EPs (p<0.01, N=10-13). Myoblast-EPs displayed a bimodal size distribution profile with peaks at <200 nm and 400-600 nm, compared to myotube-EPs that were largely 50-300 nm in size. Total protein yield from myotube-EPs was nearly 15-fold higher than myoblast-EPs, (p<0.001 N=6-9). Similar biophysical characteristics were observed when EVs were isolated using dUC: myotube-EVs (~195 nm) remained 41% smaller in average size than myoblast-EVs (~330 nm, p=0.07, N=4-6) and had comparable size distribution profiles as EPs isolated via TEI. Myotube-EVs also had 4.7-fold higher protein yield vs . myoblast EVs (p<0.05, N=4-6). Myotube-EPs had significantly decreased expression of exosomal marker proteins TSG101, CD63, ALIX and CD81 compared to myoblast-EPs (p<0.05, N=7-12). Conversely, microvesicle marker ARF6, and lipoprotein marker APO-A1was only found in the myotube-EPs (p<0.05, N=4-12). There was no effect of acute stimulation on myotube-EP biophysical characteristics (N=7), nor on expression of TSG101, ARF6 or CD81 (N=5-6). Myoblasts treated with control or acute stimulation-derived EPs (13 μg/well) for 48hrs and 72hrs showed no changes in mitochondrial mass (MitoTracker Red), cell viability or cell count (N=3-4). Myoblasts treated with EP-depleted media (72hrs) had ~90% lower cell counts (p<0.01, N=3). Our data show that EVs differ in size, distribution, protein yield and expression of subtype markers pre- vs . post-skeletal muscle differentiation. There was no effect of acute stimulation on biophysical profile or protein markers in EPs. Acute stimulation-derived EPs did not alter mitochondrial mass nor cell count/viability. Further investigation into the effects of chronic contractile activity on the biophysical characteristics and cargo of skeletal muscle-specific EVs are warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicExtracellular vesicles in diseaseFrench-language works237,207