Comparison of the fatty acid composition of total lipids and phospholipids in breast milk from Japanese women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatty acid (FA) composition of total lipids (TL) and phospholipids (PL) in breast milk obtained from 20 normal delivery healthy women in Tokyo, Japan was analyzed. Total lipids were extracted from the samples and then PL, consisting of phosphatidylcholine (PC), phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), phosphatidylserine (PS), sphingomyelin (Sph) and phosphatidylinositol (PI), were separated by two-dimensional thin-layer chromatography. The FA composition of TL and PL was analyzed by gas liquid-chromatography. Compared with previous reports, the contents of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n-3) in TL from Japanese women were higher than those from Chinese and Canadian women, which may be caused by different dietary habits and food types consumed by those populations. The contents of arachidonic acid (AA; 20:4n-6), EPA and DHA in PE and PI were much higher than those in PC. In addition, no significant correlation of EPA or DHA content was found between TL and PL. The findings indicate that PL especially PE and PI in human milk may be a source of EPA and DHA for infants in the rapid developmental stage. These results should be considered in infant formula production.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".