MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028105898 · doi:10.1007/s11745-003-1087-8

Why is carbon from some polyunsaturates extensively recycled into lipid synthesis?

2003· review· en· W2028105898 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLipids · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinolenateCarbon fibersChemistryBiochemistryFatty acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We summarize here the evidence indicating that carbon from alpha-linolenate and linoleate is readily recycled into newly synthesized lipids. This pathway consumes the majority of these fatty acids that is not beta-oxidized as a fuel. Docosahexaenoate undergoes less beta-oxidation and carbon recycling than do alpha-linolenate or linoleate, but is it still actively metabolized by this pathway? Among polyunsaturates, arachidonate appears to undergo the least beta-oxidation and carbon recycling, an observation that may help account for the resistance of brain membranes to loss of arachidonate during dietary deficiency of n-6 polyunsaturates. Preliminary evidence suggests that de novo lipid synthesis consumes carbon from alpha-linolenate and linoleate in preference to palmitate, but this merits systematic study. Active beta-oxidation and carbon recycling of 18-carbon polyunsaturates does not diminish the importance of being able to convert alpha-linolenate and linoleate to long-chain polyunsaturates but suggests that a broad perspective is required in studying the metabolism of polyunsaturates in general and alpha-linolenate and linoleate in particular.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.296 · 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