Brain lactate synthesis in thiamine deficiency: A re‐evaluation using <sup>1</sup>H‐<sup>13</sup>C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Region-selective accumulation of brain lactate occurs in TD; however, the mechanisms responsible have not been elucidated fully. (1)H and (13)C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy were therefore used to investigate de novo lactate synthesis from [1-(13)C]glucose in vulnerable (medial thalamus) and nonvulnerable (frontal cortex) brain regions of rats made thiamine deficient by administration of the central thiamine antagonist pyrithiamine. De novo synthesis of lactate was increased in the medial thalamus to 148% and 226% of pair-fed control values at presymptomatic and symptomatic stages of thiamine deficiency, respectively, whereas no such changes were observed in the frontal cortex. Administration of a glucose load selectively worsened the changes in medial thalamus. Pyruvate recycling and peripherally derived lactate did not contribute significantly to the lactate increase within the thiamine-deficient brain. Increases in immunolabeling of the lactate dehydrogenase isoenzymes (LDH1 and LDH5) were observed in the medial thalamus of thiamine-deficient animals. Metabolic impairment due to thiamine deficiency thus results in increased glycolysis, increased LDH immunolabeling of neurons and astrocytes and increased de novo synthesis of lactate in brain regions vulnerable to thiamine deficiency. These results are consistent with the notion that focal lactate accumulation participates in the worsening of neurologic symptoms in thiamine-deficient patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".