Dietary pectin, but not cellulose, influences <i>Heligmosomoides polygyrus</i> (Nematoda) reproduction and intestinal morphology in the mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary texture has been reported to influence parasite establishment and survival, but to what degree this relationship is modified by either the type or quantity of dietary fibre is unknown. Using a 2 x 4 factorial design, we explored the relationship between fibre type (soluble pectin vs insoluble = cellulose) and fibre quantity (0, 5, 10 and 20% by dry weight) on parasitic outcomes in BALB/c mice infected with 100 Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematoda) larvae. Pectin, but not cellulose, exerted a significant effect on parasite egg production. Following in vitro culture of female worms, increasing levels of dietary pectin were associated with increasing release of eggs. Yet this pattern was not observed in vivo, where per capita egg production peaked at the 10% pectin concentration, but was very low in mice fed 20% pectin. Parasite establishment was elevated in mice fed 20% pectin, but was unaffected by cellulose concentration. Neither type nor quantity of fibre affected H. polygyrus survival or spatial distribution along the gastrointestinal tract. To what degree differences in parasite establishment and reproduction could be attributed to the marked effects of pectin on gut morphology (increased intestinal length, villus length, mucosa thickness and villus/crypt ratio) requires further exploration. Our data indicate that cellulose is preferable to pectin as the source of fibre for experimental diets as cellulose did not affect H. polygyrus establishment, reproduction or survival during a 4-week primary infection.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".