Flaxseed Oil and Bone Development in Growing Male and Female Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flaxseed is being increasingly incorporated into foods as a result of its proposed health benefits. Combined with the fact that bone is sensitive to dietary changes in fatty acids, the optimization of bone metabolism during childhood may be influenced by altering the type and amounts of fatty acids consumed. The effects of whole flaxseed or its purified lignan on bone development have been investigated, but positive and/or negative effects of flaxseed oil (FO), rich in alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), on bone development have not been reported. The objective of this study was to elucidate the effects of a 10% FO diet on indices of bone health, including bone mass and biomechanical bone strength. Male and female mice were fed either a 10% flaxseed oil (FO) or a 10% corn oil (CO) diet from postnatal day (PND) 28 until PND 91. Male and female mice fed FO converted ALA to eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) and docosahexanoic acid (DHA) as indicated by significantly higher serum EPA and DHA; however, serum cytokines (interleukin-1beta, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha) with the potential to modulate bone metabolism did not significantly differ among groups. As expected, serum linoleic acid and arachidonic acid were significantly lower among mice fed FO. Feeding FO diet did not result in a higher or lower bone mass or stronger or weaker femurs and lumbar vertebra than in mice fed CO diet in either gender, suggesting that the level of ALA attainable in a 10% flaxseed oil diet is safe with regard to bone development in growing mice.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".