MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W152922779 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.6.a1121-d

The runt miniature pig is a good model to study the early origins of adult diseases

2007· article· en· W152922779 on OpenAlexafffund
Semone B. Myrie, Leslie L. McKnight, Bruce N. Van Vliet, Sukhinder Kaur Cheema, Robert F. Bertolo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBlood pressureMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyBody weightAnimal modelInsulin sensitivityDiabetes mellitusAnimal scienceBiologyInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, small birth weight and rapid compensatory growth have been linked to chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. We sought to develop a Yucatan miniature pig model to study how neonatal changes in metabolism can lead to the development of chronic disease. Runt piglets (<800g) (N=6) were paired with the largest same sex littermate (>1100g) (N=6) and fed milk replacer ad lib from 3 to 31 d of age; thereafter pigs were fed chow ad lib. At 8 mo, pigs were fitted with venous catheters and an arterial blood pressure (BP) telemeter to measure BP continuously in unrestrained pigs. During formula feeding, runts demonstrated more efficient compensatory growth and by 8 mo, runts (62.6±6.6 kg) caught up in body weight to littermates (67.5±4.7) (P>0.05), but with more back fat (P=0.03). At 8 mo, runts had 2x higher plasma triglycerides (P<0.001), 45% slower clearance of triglycerides after a fat tolerance test (P=0.045), and higher (P<0.05) mean arterial pressure (MAP) (115.6 vs 110.7 mmHg) and systolic pressure (SP) (140.8 vs 134.3 mmHg), averaged over 24 h. Birth weight was negatively correlated to MAP (P=0.02) and SP (P=0.05). Glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity tests were not different. Using the miniature pig, we have successfully established a model for compensatory growth that can be used to investigate the mechanisms of early origins of adult disease. (Supported by CIHR).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→