A western-style diet reduces bone mass and biomechanical bone strength to a greater extent in male compared with female rats during development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence from epidemiological and animal-feeding trials suggests that a western-style diet that is high in fat, and low in Ca, vitamin D and folic acid may result in low bone mass and poor bone quality: this leads to an increased risk of fragility fracture. The overall objective of the present study was to determine the effect of feeding a western-style diet (low in Ca (0.4 g/kg diet, Ca:P ratio 1:10), cholecalciferol (3 microg/kg diet), folic acid (0.23 mg/kg diet) and fibre (20 g/kg diet), and high in fat (200 g/kg diet)) for 17 weeks on bone mineral content (BMC) and the biomechanical bone strength of rat femurs. A secondary objective was to determine whether femurs from male and female rats (seven to eight rats per group) respond differently to the western-style diet. Male and female rats weighing 150-180 g were fed a western-style diet or a control diet for 17 weeks. At the end of the feeding trial, femur BMC was measured by ashing, and biomechanical properties were determined by three-point bending. Femur BMC and the majority of biomechanical properties measured were lower (P<0.05) among male and female rats fed a western-style diet compared with a control diet, despite similar weight gain and final body weight within genders. However, the western-style diet had a greater negative effect on femur BMC and biomechanical strength properties among male rats compared with females. This may be because male rats experienced greater overall body growth, as assessed by weight gain, than female rats, and suggests that the nutrient composition of the western-style diet did not support the development of strong femurs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".