Fasting and postprandial lipid response to the consumption of modified milk fats by guinea pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of three modified milk fats with different melting profiles on fasting and postprandial lipid responses and on fecal fat content in guinea pigs. We hypothesized that the consumption of modified milk fat with a high m.p. results in reduced fasting and postprandial lipid responses compared with that of modified milk fat fractions with lower m.p. To test this hypothesis, male Hartley guinea pigs were fed isoenergetic diets containing 110 g of fat/kg, either from one of the three modified milk fats with high (HMF), medium (MMF), or low melting profiles (LMF), or from one of the two reference fats as whole milk fat (MF) or a fat blend similar to that of nonhydrogenated soft margarine (MA) for 28 d. Food intake (P < 0.05) and body weight gain (P < 0.05) were reduced in the animals fed the HMF diet compared with the other groups. In the fasting state, plasma LDL cholesterol was highest in animals fed the LMF diet, intermediary in those fed the MMF and MF diets, and lowest in those fed the HMF and MA diets (P< 0.05). Postprandially, the areas under the 0- to 3-h curves for the changes in plasma TG were lower in the HMF group than in the MA- and LMF-fed guinea pigs (P< 0.05). The fecal fat content was higher (P< 0.05) in the HMF group compared to the other milk fat groups. The present results suggest that modified milk fats can impact food intake, body weight gain, fasting cholesterolemia, and postprandial triglyceridemia, and these changes may be attributed to an altered fat absorption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".