Congenital exercise ability ameliorates muscle atrophy but not spinal cord recovery in spinal cord injury mouse model

3Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) can cause loss of mobility in the limbs, and no drugs, surgical procedures, or rehabilitation strategies provide a complete cure. Exercise capacity is thought to be associated with the causes of many diseases. However, no studies to date have assessed whether congenital exercise ability is related to the recovery of spinal cord injury. High congenital exercise ability (HE) and low congenital exercise ability (LE) mice were artificially bred from the same founder ICR mice. The HE and LE groups still exhibited differences in exercise ability after 13 generations of breeding. Histological staining and immunohistochemistry staining indicated no significant differences between the HE and LE groups on recovery of the spinal cord. In contrast, after SCI, the HE group exhibited better mobility in gait analysis and longer endurance times in the exhaustive swimming test than the LE group. In addition, after SCI, the HE group also exhibited less atrophy than the LE group, and no inflammatory cells appeared. In conclusion, we found that high congenital exercise ability may reduce the rate of muscle atrophy. This result can be applied to sports science and rehabilitation science as a reference for preventive medicine research.

References Powered by Scopus

460Citations
415Readers
Get full text

This article is free to access.

This article is free to access.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tai, P. A., Hsu, Y. J., Huang, W. C., Chang, C. H., Chen, Y. H., Huang, C. C., & Wei, L. (2019). Congenital exercise ability ameliorates muscle atrophy but not spinal cord recovery in spinal cord injury mouse model. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 16(12), 1549–1556. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.37442

Readers over time

‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25036912

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 5

56%

Researcher 3

33%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 3

38%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

25%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 2

25%

Computer Science 1

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0