Rosiglitazone, a PPAR‐γ Agonist, Fails to Attenuate CLA‐Induced Milk Fat Depression and Hepatic Lipid Accumulation in Lactating Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the combination of rosiglitazone (ROSI) and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) on mammary and hepatic lipogenesis in lactating C57Bl/6 J mice. Twenty-four lactating mice were randomly assigned to one of four treatments applied from postpartum day 6 to day 10. Treatments included: (1) control diet, (2) control plus 1.5 % dietary CLA (CLA) substituted for soybean oil, (3) control plus daily intra-peritoneal (IP) rosiglitazone injections (10 mg/kg body weight) (ROSI), and (4) CLA plus ROSI (CLA-ROSI). Dam food intake and milk fat concentration were depressed with CLA. However, no effects were observed with ROSI. The CLA-induced milk fat depression was due to reduced expression for mammary lipogenic genes involved in de-novo fatty acid (FA) synthesis, FA uptake and desaturation, and triacyglycerol synthesis. Liver weight (g/100 g body weight) was increased by CLA due to an increase in lipid accumulation triggering a compensatory reduction in mRNA abundance of hepatic lipogenic enzymes, including acetyl-CoA carboxylase I and stearoyl-CoA desaturase I. On the contrary, no effects were observed with ROSI on hepatic and mammary lipogenic gene and enzyme expression. Overall, feeding CLA to lactating mice induced milk fat depression and increased hepatic lipid accumulation, probably due to the presence of trans-10, cis-12 CLA isomer, while ROSI failed to significantly attenuate both hepatic steatosis and reduction in milk fat content.
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 | 0.001 | 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".