Effects of insulin infusion on glucose homeostasis and glucose metabolism in rainbow trout fed a high-carbohydrate diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The origin for the poor glucose utilization in carnivorous fish species fed high carbohydrate diets remains under debate. In the present study, we have fed rainbow trout a diet containing 30% carbohydrate for 1 or 5 days. In both cases, fish were implanted with mini-osmotic pumps releasing 0.7 i.u. kg(-1) day(-1) bovine insulin, and mRNA transcripts and the protein phosphorylation status of proteins controlling glycemia and glucose-related metabolism were studied in fish killed 6 h after the last meal. We demonstrate that when the exposure occurs over a short term (30 h), insulin exerts beneficial actions on trout glucose homeostasis, including a lowered glycemia and increased hepatic lipogenic and glycogenic potentials. However, when trout were fed for 5 days, these beneficial actions of insulin infusion were no longer observed. Thus, the increased lipogenic potential observed after one single meal was not present, and this together with the increased glycogenesis and the decreased glucose exported to the blood from the liver explains the lack of hypoglycemic action of insulin. The fact that insulin improved glucose homeostasis when administrated over a short time period implies that endogenous insulin secretion is inadequate in trout to deal with this amount of dietary carbohydrates. Moreover, the fact that a longer exposure to insulin resulted in a reduced response indicates that the rainbow trout is sensitive to insulin, re-enforcing the hypothesis that the hyperglycemia observed following a high carbohydrate meal is an insulin secretion issue rather an insulin action issue.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".