A multitracer stable isotope quantification of the effects of arginine intake on whole body arginine metabolism in neonatal piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have previously shown that deficient arginine intake increased the rate of endogenous arginine synthesis from proline. In this paper, we report in vivo quantification of the effects of arginine intake on total endogenous arginine synthesis, on the rates of conversion between arginine, citrulline, ornithine, and proline, and on nitric oxide synthesis. Male piglets, with gastric catheters for diet and isotope infusion and femoral vein catheters for blood sampling, received a complete diet for 2 days and then either a generous (+Arg; 1.80 g x kg(-1) x day(-1); n = 5) or deficient (-Arg; 0.20 g.kg(-1).day(-1); n = 5) arginine diet for 5 days. On day 7, piglets received a primed, constant infusion of [guanido-(15)N(2)]arginine, [ureido-(13)C;5,5-(2)H(2)]citrulline, [U-(13)C(5)]ornithine, and [(15)N;U-(13)C(5)]proline in an integrated study of the metabolism of arginine and its precursors. Arginine synthesis (micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) from both proline (+Arg: 42, -Arg: 74, pooled SE: 5) and citrulline (+Arg: 67, -Arg: 120; pooled SE: 15) were higher in piglets receiving the -Arg diet (P < 0.05); and for both diets proline accounted for approximately 60% of total endogenous arginine synthesis. The conversion of proline to citrulline (+Arg: 39, -Arg: 67, pooled SE: 6) was similar to the proline-to-arginine conversion, confirming that citrulline formation limits arginine synthesis from proline in piglets. Nitric oxide synthesis (micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)), measured by the rate conversion of [guanido-(15)N(2)]arginine to [ureido-(15)N]citrulline, was greater in piglets receiving the +Arg diet (105) than in those receiving the -Arg diet (46, pooled SE: 10; P < 0.05). This multi-isotope method successfully allowed many aspects of arginine metabolism to be quantified simultaneously in vivo.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".