MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differentiating short‐ and long‐term effects of diet in the obese mouse using <sup>1</sup> H‐nuclear magnetic resonance metabolomics

2011· article· en· W2096349641 on OpenAlexafffund
Gavin E. Duggan, Dustin S. Hittel, Curtis C. Hughey, Aalim M. Weljie, Hans J. Vogel, Jane Shearer

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Obesity and Metabolism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleCanadian Diabetes AssociationHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMetabolomicsMetaboliteObesityWeaningEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyMedicineBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study determined whether targeted metabolomic profiling of serum, using 1H nuclear magnetic resonance, could be employed to distinguish the effects of obesity from those of diet in mice. Following weaning, littermates were randomly divided into two diet groups: chow and high fat. After 12 weeks of dietary manipulation, fat-fed animals were obese and hyperglycaemic. Mice from each treatment either maintained their current diet or switched to the opposite diet for a final week. Differences in metabolite levels were determined using orthogonal projection to latent structures and cross-validated discriminant analysis. The short- and long-term effects of each diet could be clearly distinguished. Short-term diet effects are the major contributor to the metabolic profile, underscoring the need for controls beyond the standard fast before serum collection. This work shows the importance of dietary controls when attempting to isolate obesity-related changes and highlights the ability of metabolomics to identify subtle changes when experiments are properly structured.

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 score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Obesity and MetabolismSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207