MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Sarcolipin Ablation Impairs Muscle Regeneration After Acute Injury

2016· article· en· W4389007808 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine A. Bellissimo, Éric Bombardier, Paige J. Chambers, Val A. Fajardo, Russ Tupling

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCardiotoxinMyogenesisRegeneration (biology)SERCASkeletal muscleMuscular dystrophyInternal medicineMyocyteEndocrinologyBiologyAnatomyChemistryAndrologyCell biologyMedicineATPaseBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sarcolipin (SLN) is a small transmembrane protein that regulates the sarco(endo)plasmic reticulum calcium ATPase (SERCA) pump in muscle. SLN is highly expressed in embryonic muscle and is involved in the regulation of myogenesis. SLN is also upregulated in mouse dystrophic muscles but the role of SLN in muscular dystrophy is unknown. Since muscular dystrophy is characterized by high rates of muscle degeneration/regeneration, one hypothesis is that SLN may be important in the regeneration process but this has not been examined specifically. Here, we used an acute cardiotoxin injury model and Sln ‐null mice to determine SLN's role in muscle regeneration. The tibialis anterior of 30 mice, 15 wild type (WT) and 15 Sln ‐null mice were injected with cardiotoxin and sacrificed at day 7, 14 and 21 post injury. Muscle homogenates and sections were prepared and used for immunoblotting and immunofluorescence analyses, respectively. Interestingly, ectopic expression of SLN was seen in WT animals only at 21 days post injury. Correspondingly, Sln‐ null mice showed elevated centralized nuclei, a marker of regenerating fibers, specifically at day 21 post injury compared to their WT counterparts (2.7 ± 1.0 ×10 −4 vs. 3.8 ± 0.6 ×10 −4 , per regenerating area (μm 2 ), p=0.03 ). In addition, the average cross‐sectional area of the regenerating myofibers was significantly smaller in the Sln‐ null mice only at day 21 post injury compared to WT (1925 ± 168 μm 2 vs. 1471 ± 57 μm 2 , p =0.01 ). Taken together, the failure to clear central nuclei and increase myofiber size at day 21 post injury indicates that SLN ablation delays the later stages of muscle regeneration. Support or Funding Information This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; MOP 86618 and MOP 47296 to A.R.T).

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicMuscle Physiology and Disorders→French-language works237,207→