Short communication: Grain-induced subacute ruminal acidosis is associated with the differential expression of insulin-like growth factor-binding proteins in rumen papillae of lactating dairy cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to characterize the mRNA expression of genes involved in the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis in the rumen epithelium during grain-induced ruminal acidosis. Eight lactating dairy cattle were randomly assigned to a control (38% concentrate) or a high-grain (HG; 57% concentrate) diet in a randomized study. Dry matter intake, milk production, ruminal pH, and rumen papillae gene expression were measured before treatment allocation (d 0) and on the fourth day of treatment. On d 4, no differences were observed in total feed intake and milk production; however, the cattle fed the HG diet displayed lower ruminal pH (587 ± 130 min/d below 5.6; mean ± SE) compared with cattle receiving the control diet (169 ± 145 min/d below 5.6). No change in the relative mRNA expression of IGF-1, IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R), and IGF-binding protein 6 (IGFBP6) was detected between treatments. However, the relative expression value of IGF-binding protein 3 (IGFBP3) decreased (0.73 ± 0.07 fold, mean ± SE), whereas IGF-binding protein 5 (IGFBP5) expression increased (1.53 ± 0.20 fold). These results indicate that the IGF axis may play a role in rumen epithelial adaptation to HG diets.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".