Comparative Proteomic Analysis of Glycolytic and Oxidative Muscle in Pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quality of meat is highly correlated with muscle fiber type. However, the mechanisms via which proteins regulate muscle fiber types in pigs are not entirely understood. In the current study, we have performed proteomic profiling of fast/glycolytic biceps femoris (BF) and slow/oxidative soleus (SOL) muscles and identified several candidate differential proteins among these. We performed proteomic analyses based on tandem mass tags (TMTs) and identified a total of 26,228 peptides corresponding to 2667 proteins among the BF and SOL muscle samples. Among these, we found 204 differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) between BF and SOL muscle, with 56 up-regulated and 148 down-regulated DEPs in SOL muscle samples. KEGG and GO enrichment analyses of the DEPs revealed that the DEPs are involved in some GO terms (e.g., actin cytoskeleton, myosin complex, and cytoskeletal parts) and signaling pathways (PI3K-Akt and NF-kappa B signaling pathways) that influence muscle fiber type. A regulatory network of protein-protein interaction (PPI) between these DEPs that regulates muscle fiber types was constructed, which demonstrates how three down-regulated DEPs, including PFKM, GAPDH, and PKM, interact with other proteins to potentially control the glycolytic process. This study offers a new understanding of the molecular mechanisms in glycolytic and oxidative muscles as well as a novel approach for enhancing meat quality by transforming the type of muscle fibers in pigs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".