Dietary oils modify the host immune response and colonic tissue damage following<i>Citrobacter rodentium</i>infection in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inflammatory bowel disease is an intestinal inflammatory disorder of multifactorial origin, in which diets that favor high n-6 and low n-3 fatty acids have been implicated. The present study addressed whether dietary n-6 and n-3 fatty acids alter colonic mucosal response to Citrobacter rodentium (C. rodentium) infection. Mice were fed diets identical except for fatty acids, with an energy percentage of 15% 18:2n-6 and <0.06% 18:3n-3, 4.2% 18:2n-6 and 1.9% 18:3n-3, or 1.44% 20:5n-3, 4.9% 22:6n-3, 0.32% 18:2n-6, and 0.12% 18:3n-3 from safflower, canola, or fish oil, respectively for 3 wk before infection. Dietary oils had no effect on colonic C. rodentium growth but altered colon 20:4n-6/(20:5n-3+22:6n-3) with 9.40 ± 0.06, 1.94 ± 0.08, and 0.32 ± 0.03% in colon phosphatidylcholine and 3.82 ± 0.18, 1.14 ± 0.02, and 0.30 ± 0.02% in phosphatidylethanolamine of mice fed safflower, canola, or fish oil, respectively. At 10 days postinfection, histological damage, F4/80-positive macrophages, and myeloperoxidase-positive neutrophils in colonic mucosa were higher in infected mice fed safflower than fish oil. Colon gene transcripts for macrophage inflammatory protein 2, keratinocyte cytokine, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 expression were significantly higher in infected mice fed safflower than canola or fish oil; IFN-γ, IL-6, and IL-17A expression were significantly elevated in mice fed safflower rather than fish oil; and IL-10 was significantly higher in mice fed fish oil rather than canola or safflower oil. This study demonstrates that oils high in 18:2n-6 with minimal n-3 fatty acids exacerbate mucosal immune response, whereas oils high in n-3 fatty acids attenuate mucosal immune response to C. rodentium. These studies implicate dietary oils as environmental modifiers of intestinal inflammation in response to infection.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".