Acidosis and Lipopolysaccharide from Escherichia coli B:055 Cause Hyperpermeability of Rumen and Colon Tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present investigation was to evaluate the effects of acidic pH of the perfusate and presence of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) on permeability of rumen and colon mucosal tissues to mannitol and LPS using the Ussing chamber system. Rumen and colon tissues (n = 8), obtained from slaughtered feedlot steers, were tested for changes in permeability to (3)H-mannitol under pH of 4.5, 5.5, and 6.5 for rumen and at 5.5, 6.5, and 7.4 for colon, with or without LPS from Escherichia coli B:055 at 500 microg/mL. The (3)H-Mannitol was added at 10 microL (525.4 GBq/mmol) on the mucosal side of the Ussing chamber to detect changes in permeability, and 4 samples were taken at 20, 25, 30, and 35 min from the serosal side. Permeability of rumen and colon mucosa to (3)H-mannitol increased 6- and 5-fold, respectively, at acidic pH values of 4.5 and 5.5 and in the presence of 500 micro/mL of LPS. In contrast, LPS did not affect rumen and colon permeability at pH that ranged from 5.5 and 7.4. Translocation of LPS across the rumen and colon mucosa of cattle was not pH dependent. The LPS translocated through these tissues if present at the mucosal side. In conclusion, the permeability of rumen and colon tissues to (3)H-mannitol increased in presence of LPS and under acidic pH, whereas LPS permeated through mucosal tissues independently of the pH of the perfusate. Further research is warranted to understand the mechanism(s) by which acidic pH of the rumen digesta and presence of LPS make rumen and colon tissues "leaky".
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".