Dietary Long‐chain Inulin Improves Body Composition but Not Bone Density in Growing Female Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New strategies to improve calcium absorption and bone health are needed to address osteoporosis prevention and management. Inulin‐type fructans may be an effective strategy, but have not yet been tested in a young female model. Our objective was to investigate the effect of long chain (LC) inulin on bone density in growing female rats. Weanling rats were assigned to baseline, inulin (IN), or cellulose (CL) treatments for 4 or 8 weeks. Whole body (WB) and selected regions were analyzed for bone mineral density (BMD) by dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry (DXA) and serum markers of bone turnover were assessed by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assays. Femoral calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) concentrations were determined by inductively‐coupled plasma spectrometry. Feeding IN resulted in 6% higher femoral weight (adjusted for body weight), 17% higher serum osteocalcin levels (bone formation marker), and 4% lower femoral P concentrations at week 4. IN did not affect WB or regional BMD, but was associated with a 31% lower parametrial fat pad mass at week 8. In summary, LC inulin did not improve bone density in growing female rats, despite positively impacting body composition. Funding from NSERC and MICH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".