MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108387315 · doi:10.1093/carcin/21.2.317

No change in spontaneous mutation frequency or specificity in dietary restricted mice

2000· article· en· W2108387315 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory R. Stuart

Bibliographic record

VenueCarcinogenesis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutationMutation frequencyBiologyGeneticsEndocrinologyInternal medicineGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that dietary restricted rodents live longer and are generally healthier than their ad libitum fed counterparts, with fewer tumors. Additionally, while dietary restriction appears to reduce the frequency of chemically induced mutation in laboratory animals, relatively little is known regarding the effect of dietary restriction on spontaneous mutational events. Although spontaneous mutation rates are generally low compared with chemically induced events, spontaneous mutations accumulate in most tissues over the lifetime of the animal and are therefore expected to contribute significantly to spontaneous neoplasia. It is generally presumed that dietary restriction results in less oxidative damage and a lowering of the mutation frequency. Here we report the results of dietary restriction on mutation frequency and specificity in lacI transgenic mice aged 6 and 12 months. Unexpectedly, no changes were observed in either the frequency or specificity of mutation in dietary restricted mice, compared with ad libitum controls. We therefore conclude that dietary restriction appears to have no appreciable effect on spontaneous mutation, at least in chromosomal DNA.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarcinogenesisSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207