Sex differences in neuromuscular and biological determinants of isometric maximal force
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Force expression is characterized by an interplay of biological and molecular determinants that are expected to differentiate males and females in terms of maximal performance. These include muscle characteristics (muscle size, fiber type, contractility), neuromuscular regulation (central and peripheral factors of force expression), and individual genetic factors (miRNAs and gene/protein expression). This research aims to comprehensively assess these physiological variables and their role as determinants of maximal force difference between sexes. METHODS: Experimental evaluations include neuromuscular components of isometric contraction, intrinsic muscle characteristics (proteins and fiber type), and some biomarkers associated with muscle function (circulating miRNAs and gut microbiome) in 12 young and healthy males and 12 females. RESULTS: Male strength superiority appears to stem primarily from muscle size while muscle fiber-type distribution plays a crucial role in contractile properties. Moderate-to-strong pooled correlations between these muscle parameters were established with specific circulating miRNAs, as well as muscle and plasma proteins. CONCLUSION: Muscle size is crucial in explaining the differences in maximal voluntary isometric force generation between males and females with similar fiber type distribution. Potential physiological mechanisms are seen from associations between maximal force, skeletal muscle contractile properties, and biological markers.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".