MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090092460 · doi:10.3382/ps.2013-03362

Differences in intestinal mucin dynamics between germ-free and conventionally reared chickens after mannan-oligosaccharide supplementation

2014· article· en· W2090092460 on OpenAlexaff
Shira L. Cheled-Shoval, N.G.S. Shantha Gamage, Einat Amit‐Romach, Rebecca E. A. Forder, J. Marshal, Andrew Van Kessel, Zehava Uni

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMucinBacteriaPopulationMicrobiologyOligosaccharideMannanGoblet cellBiologyCecumChemistryPolysaccharideFood scienceBiochemistryEpithelium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A germ-free (GF) chicken model was used to test 2 hypotheses: 1. microbial colonization of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) influences mucin gene expression and mucin types; and 2. mannan oligosaccharide (MOS) supplementation affects GIT cells directly, without bacteria mediation, compared with bacterial-mediated effect (i.e., indirectly). Gnotobiotic isolators were used: 1) GF, 2) with a single bacteria population, and 3) conventionalized by exposure to cecal bacterial contents. Each was divided to 2 diet groups: with or without MOS (2 kg/t) for 1 wk. Results show that the absence of bacteria in the GIT caused a reduction in neutral and acidic goblet cell (GC) number and density, an increase in sulfated mucin, absence of sialylated GC, and reduced mucin 2 mRNA expression in the small intestine of GF compared with conventional birds. These results indicate a reduced development of mucin production and secretion in the absence of GIT bacteria implying a less mature small intestine mucosa, supporting our first hypothesis. Results from the single bacteria population group were not conclusive and did not support any of the hypotheses. Supplementation of MOS, regardless of microbial presence, caused a reduction in neutral GC number and density but increased neutral GC area. The MOS caused different effects on acidic mucins in conventional and GF birds, causing a reduction in sialylated GC number (conventional) and a reduction in sulfated GC density (GF), all supporting a direct effect of MOS in GF animals, in addition to an indirect effect via gut microflora.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207