Effects of dietary supplementation with flax during prepuberty on fatty acid profile, mammogenesis, and bone resorption in gilts1,2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The possible role of dietary flax on pre-pubertal development of mammary glands and bone resorption was investigated in gilts. Fifty-seven gilts were fed 1 of 4 diets from 88 d of age until slaughter (d 212 +/- 1). Diets were control without flax (n = 14); 10% flaxseed supplementation (n = 13); 6.5% flaxseed meal supplementation (n = 15); and 3.5% flaxseed oil supplementation (n = 15). All diets were isonitrogenous and isocaloric. Jugular blood samples were obtained on d 78 and 210 to establish the fatty acid profile and to determine the concentrations of prolactin, estradiol, and cross-linked N-telopeptides of type I collagen. At slaughter, the mammary glands were excised, parenchymal and extraparenchymal tissues were dissected, and the composition of the parenchymal tissue (protein, fat, DM, and DNA) was determined. Histochemical analyses of the mammary parenchyma were performed, and fatty acid profiles in the extraparenchymal tissue were evaluated. Dietary flax increased (P < or = 0.001) the concentrations of PUFA and decreased those of SFA (P < 0.01) and MUFA (P < or = 0.001) in plasma and extraparenchymal tissues, which was largely due to the inclusion of 10% flaxseed or 3.5% flaxseed oil (P < or = 0.01) but not 6.5% flaxseed meal. Circulating concentrations of prolactin and estradiol were unaltered by treatments (P > 0.1), but concentrations of cross-linked N-telopeptides of type I collagen tended to be greater (P < 0.1) in flax-supplemented gilts. The DM content of parenchymal tissue was the only mammary compositional value affected, showing an increase with flax addition (P < 0.05). No change (P > or = 0.1) in the bromodeoxyuridine labeling index or estrogen receptor localization was observed with treatments. Dietary supplementation with flax as seed, meal, or oil, therefore, brought about the expected changes in the fatty acid profile but had no beneficial effects on mammary development or bone resorption.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".