Metabolic Characteristics of Primary Muscle Cells of Diet Sensitive and Diet Resistant Obese Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Ottawa Hospital Weight Management Clinic, we have previously identified subpopulations of patients in the upper and lower quintiles for rate of weight loss, and characterized them as ‘obese diet sensitive’ (ODS) and ‘obese diet resistant’ (ODR) patient groups, respectively. Skeletal muscle is a major contributor to basal metabolic rate and mitochondrial proton leak in skeletal muscle can account for up to 50 % of resting oxygen consumption. The overall aim of this research is to explore differences in mitochondrial function in human primary myotubes from ODS and ODR subjects.\n\nSubsets of ODS and ODR subjects (n = 9/group) who followed a hypocaloric clinical weight loss program at the Ottawa Weight Management Clinic consented to a muscle (vastus lateralis) biopsy. Human primary myoblasts obtained from biopsies were immunopurified and differentiated into myotubes. Mitochondrial function and distribution were compared in intact myotubes from ODS and ODR subjects. \n\nMitochondrial proton leak was significantly lower (p< 0.05) in ODR myotubes compared to ODS myotubes, independent of whether cells were differentiated in low or high glucose medium. In addition, in low glucose medium, ODR myotubes had higher MnSOD protein levels compared to ODS myotubes (p< 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in mitochondrial content, mitochondrial membrane potential, cellular ROS levels or ATP content between ODS and ODR myotubes. Overall, our in vitro mitochondrial proton leak results are consistent with our previous ex vivo results. Future research should examine the possibility that differences in proton leak between ODS and ODR groups may be related to mechanisms of cellular ROS regulation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".