| Title |
Endurance Capacity, Not Body Size, Determines Physical Activity Levels: Role of Skeletal Muscle PEPCK
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, June 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0005869 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Colleen M. Novak, Carlos Escande, Susan M. Gerber, Eduardo N. Chini, Minzhi Zhang, Steven L. Britton, Lauren G. Koch, James A. Levine |
| Abstract |
Some people remain lean despite pressure to gain weight. Lean people tend to have high daily activity levels, but the source of this increased activity is unknown. We found that leanness cannot be accounted for by increased weight-corrected food intake in two different types of lean rats. As previously reported in lean people, we found that lean rats had higher daily activity levels; lean rats also expended more energy. These lean rats were developed through artificial selection for high aerobic endurance capacity. To test whether our findings extended to a human population, we measured endurance capacity using a VO(2max) treadmill test and daily activity in a group of non-exercising individuals. Similar to lean rats selectively bred for endurance capacity, our study revealed that people with higher VO(2max) also spent more time active throughout the day. Hence, endurance capacity may be the trait that underlies both physical activity levels and leanness. We identified one potential mechanism for the lean, active phenotype in rats, namely high levels of skeletal muscle PEPCK. Therefore, the lean phenotype is characterized by high endurance capacity and high activity and may stem from altered skeletal muscle energetics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 25% |
| Spain | 2 | 10% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Colombia | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| South Africa | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 65% |
| Scientists | 4 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2022.
All research outputs
#3,063,276
of 25,223,158 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#38,307
of 218,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,456
of 118,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#113
of 522 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,223,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 218,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 118,723 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 522 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.