MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002670412 · doi:10.1159/000241347

Carnitine Acetyltransferase in Developing Mammals

2009· article· en· W2002670412 on OpenAlexaff
David Seccombe, Peter Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of the Neonate · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism and Genetic Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal HealthCentre for Drug Research and Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrown adipose tissueAdipose tissueInternal medicineEndocrinologyMicrosomeBiologyFetusPeroxisomeCarnitineMitochondrionEnzymeBiochemistryPregnancyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carnitine acetyltransferase (CAT) activity was determined in mitochondria and microsomes of liver and brown adipose tissue in fetal and postnatal rats, rabbits and guinea pigs. In rat liver and brown adipose tissue, mitochondrial CAT activity increased perinatally. Microsomal CAT activity also increased in brown adipose tissue. In liver, however, a rise was first noted after the 20th postnatal day. The ratio of mitochondrial to microsomal activity was higher in brown fat than liver throughout the period studied. Absolute values for both were always much higher in brown adipose tissue than in liver. Catalase activity (an enzyme localized in the peroxisomes) in rat liver increased after day 20 while in brown adipose tissue it attained a peak at 7 days after birth. At all times, hepatic activity exceeded activity in brown adipose tissue. The ratio on day 30 was 1 (brown adipose tissue) to 25 (liver). In both guinea pigs and rabbits, hepatic mitochondrial CAT activity was 10- to 20-fold higher than in the rat already prenatally. Microsomal activity, on the other hand, was approximately the same in all three species. It is concluded that probably only the mitochondrial CAT is directly related to fatty acid oxidation. The role of microsomal enzyme remains unclear.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of the NeonateSame topicMetabolism and Genetic DisordersFrench-language works237,207