Study record
Mitochondria related peptide MOTS-c suppresses ovariectomy-induced bone loss via AMPK activation
Ming W, Lu G, Xin S et al. · Biochem Biophys Res Commun · 2016
AnimalMOTS-c administeredEvidence tier CAlso: Cell study (in vitro)
What this study reported
In ovariectomized mice, MOTS-c treatment was associated with less bone loss on micro-CT. In culture, MOTS-c inhibited RANKL-induced osteoclast differentiation and increased phosphorylated AMPK, and the AMPK inhibitor compound C partially abrogated the effect on osteoclastogenesis.
Limitations
Females only in a single surgical menopause model; group sizes not reported in the abstract; AMPK dependence shown only partially with a pharmacological inhibitor.
Study record
| Study model | Animal study (in vivo) |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | MOTS-c administeredSynthetic MOTS-c was given to cells, animals or people. |
| Species | mouse |
| System studied | Ovariectomized female C57BL/6 mice; RANKL-induced osteoclast differentiation in culture |
| Population | Not reported |
| Design | Controlled animal experiment with cell culture experiments |
| Sample size as reported | Not reported |
| Control group | ovariectomized mice not given MOTS-c (implied); AMPK inhibitor compound C in culture |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | bone loss by micro-CT; osteoclast differentiation; AMPK phosphorylation |
| Pathways measured | AMPK signalling |
| Research areas | Bone |
| Evidence tier | C — Animal in vivo |
| Publication types | Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Mammalian
- Sample size
- Not reported
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Surrogate
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.