Prenatal Dietary Docosahexaenoic Acid Supplementation in Combination with Protein Restriction Does Not Affect Blood Pressure in Adult Wistar Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent findings indicate that prenatal protein restriction, which leads to elevated blood pressure in adult rats, results in decreased levels of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in neonatal rat brain. In light of the evidence of a relationship between dietary DHA and adult blood pressure, the purpose of this study was to ascertain whether prenatal dietary supplementation with DHA would prevent the development of hypertension associated with maternal protein restriction. Throughout gestation, female Wistar rats were fed isocaloric diets containing either 18% casein + 10% corn oil (CON; control), 9% casein + 10% corn oil (LP; low-protein) or 9% casein + 8.5% corn oil + 1.5% DHASCO (LP + 0.6% DHA). DHA increased levels of DHA in neonatal forebrain but there were no effects of LP. At 10 weeks there were no dietary effects on blood pressure measured on four consecutive days using tail-cuff plethysmography. There were also no significant effects measured at 30 weeks, using femoral artery catheterisation, despite adequate power to detect a 10 mm Hg difference. Trends in corticosterone measurements suggested higher stress reactivity in the LP group. These results do not provide strong support for the prenatal low protein model of hypertension and a relation with dietary DHA.
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".