Study record
Mitochondrial-derived peptides and exercise
Woodhead JST, Merry TL · Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj · 2021
What this study reported
Reviewed evidence that acute high-intensity exercise increases humanin and MOTS-c concentrations in human skeletal muscle and plasma, while findings for chronic training are inconsistent and may depend on training mode, intensity and participant characteristics. Also summarised mouse work in which administered MOTS-c was associated with improved exercise capacity and metabolic measures, noting evidence for distinct and overlapping pathways with exercise.
Limitations
Narrative review without systematic search; the human evidence base is small and heterogeneous, and the mechanistic claims rest largely on rodent studies.
Study record
| Study model | Review |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | SeveralMore than one of these is central to the paper (common for reviews). |
| Species | Not reported |
| System studied | Narrative review of mitochondrial-derived peptides and exercise in humans and mice |
| Population | Not reported |
| Design | Narrative review |
| Sample size as reported | Not reported |
| Control group | Not reported |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | muscle and plasma MOTS-c; exercise capacity; insulin sensitivity; antioxidant capacity |
| Pathways measured | AMPK signalling · Insulin & glucose handling · Oxidative stress |
| Research areas | Exercise · Metabolic · Skeletal muscle · Mitochondrial biology |
| Evidence tier | R — Review (context, not evidence) |
| Publication types | Journal Article, Review |
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
- n/a
- Sample size
- n/a
- Controls
- n/a
- Outcome validity
- n/a
- 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.