Title |
Distinct lipid droplet characteristics and distribution unmask the apparent contradiction of the athlete's paradox
|
---|---|
Published in |
Molecular Metabolism, August 2018
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.molmet.2018.08.004 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sabine Daemen, Anne Gemmink, Bram Brouwers, Ruth C.R. Meex, Peter R. Huntjens, Gert Schaart, Esther Moonen-Kornips, Johanna Jörgensen, Joris Hoeks, Patrick Schrauwen, Matthijs K.C. Hesselink |
Abstract |
Intramyocellular lipid (IMCL) storage negatively associates with insulin resistance, albeit not in endurance-trained athletes. We investigated the putative contribution of lipid droplet (LD) morphology and subcellular localization to the so-called athlete's paradox. We performed quantitative immunofluorescent confocal imaging of muscle biopsy sections from endurance Trained, Lean sedentary, Obese, and Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) participants (n = 8/group). T2DM patients and Trained individuals were matched for IMCL content. Furthermore we performed this analysis in biopsies of T2DM patients before and after a 12-week exercise program (n = 8). We found marked differences in lipid storage morphology between trained subjects and T2DM: the latter group mainly store lipid in larger LDs in the subsarcolemmal (SS) region of type II fibers, whereas Trained store lipid in a higher number of LDs in the intramyofibrillar (IMF) region of type I fibers. In addition, a twelve-week combined endurance and strength exercise program resulted in a LD phenotype shift in T2DM patients partly towards an 'athlete-like' phenotype, accompanied by improved insulin sensitivity. Proteins involved in LD turnover were also more abundant in Trained than in T2DM and partly changed in an 'athlete-like' fashion in T2DM patients upon exercise training. Our findings provide a physiological explanation for the athlete's paradox and reveal LD morphology and distribution as a major determinant of skeletal muscle insulin sensitivity. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 19 | 30% |
Canada | 5 | 8% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 6% |
Netherlands | 3 | 5% |
Chile | 3 | 5% |
Finland | 3 | 5% |
France | 3 | 5% |
Brazil | 1 | 2% |
Ireland | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 6% |
Unknown | 18 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 33 | 52% |
Members of the public | 23 | 36% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 8% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 133 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 20% |
Student > Bachelor | 20 | 15% |
Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
Researcher | 9 | 7% |
Lecturer | 5 | 4% |
Other | 15 | 11% |
Unknown | 39 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 23% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 9% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 8% |
Sports and Recreations | 11 | 8% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 8% |
Other | 11 | 8% |
Unknown | 46 | 35% |