Ischemic Preconditioning and Postconditioning Protect the Heart by Preserving the Mitochondrial Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mitochondria fuse to form elongated networks which are more tolerable to stress and injury. Ischemic pre- and postconditioning (IPC and IPost, respectively) are established cardioprotective strategies in the preclinical setting. Whether IPC and IPost modulates mitochondrial morphology is unknown. We hypothesize that the protective effects of IPC and IPost may be conferred via preservation of mitochondrial network. Methods: IPC and IPost were applied to the H9c2 rat myoblast cells, isolated adult primary murine cardiomyocytes, and the Langendorff-isolated perfused rat hearts. The effects of IPC and IPost on cardiac cell death following ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI), mitochondrial morphology, and gene expression of mitochondrial-shaping proteins were investigated. Results: IPC and IPost successfully reduced cardiac cell death and myocardial infarct size. IPC and IPost maintained the mitochondrial network in both H9c2 and isolated adult primary murine cardiomyocytes. 2D-length measurement of the 3 mitochondrial subpopulations showed that IPC and IPost significantly increased the length of interfibrillar mitochondria (IFM). Gene expression of the pro-fusion protein, Mfn1, was significantly increased by IPC, while the pro-fission protein, Drp1, was significantly reduced by IPost in the H9c2 cells. In the primary cardiomyocytes, gene expression of both Mfn1 and Mfn2 were significantly upregulated by IPC and IPost, while Drp1 was significantly downregulated by IPost. In the Langendorff-isolated perfused heart, gene expression of Drp1 was significantly downregulated by both IPC and IPost. Conclusion: IPC and IPost-mediated upregulation of pro-fusion proteins (Mfn1 and Mfn2) and downregulation of pro-fission (Drp1) promote maintenance of the interconnected mitochondrial network, ultimately conferring cardioprotection against IRI.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".