MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095151919 · doi:10.3390/ijms16059303

The Role of Food Peptides in Lipid Metabolism during Dyslipidemia and Associated Health Conditions

2015· review· en· W2095151919 on OpenAlexafffund
Chibuike C. Udenigwe, Kirsti Rouvinen‐Watt

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDyslipidemiaLipid metabolismBiochemistryNutraceuticalMetabolismBiologyEnzymeFunctional foodPeptideEnterohepatic circulationChemistryEndocrinologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal and human clinical studies have demonstrated the ability of dietary food proteins to modulate endogenous lipid levels during abnormal lipid metabolism (dyslipidemia). Considering the susceptibility of proteins to gastric proteolytic activities, the hypolipidemic functions of proteins are possibly due, in part, to their peptide fragments. Food-derived peptides may directly modulate abnormal lipid metabolism in cell cultures and animal models of dyslipidemia. The peptides are thought to act by perturbing intestinal absorption of dietary cholesterol and enterohepatic bile acid circulation, and by inhibiting lipogenic enzymatic activities and gene expression in hepatocytes and adipocytes. Recent evidence indicates that the hypolipidemic activities of some peptides are due to activation of hepatic lipogenic transcription factors. However, detailed molecular mechanisms and structural requirements of peptides for these activities are yet to be elucidated. As hypolipidemic peptides can be released during enzymatic food processing, future studies can explore the prospects of combating metabolic syndrome and associated complications using peptide-rich functional food and nutraceutical products.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations82
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicProtein Hydrolysis and Bioactive PeptidesFrench-language works237,207