Intestinal microbiota differentially affect brush border enzyme activity and gene expression in the neonatal gnotobiotic pig
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To study microbial influence on intestinal development pertaining to nutrient digestion, two separate gnotobiotic experiments were performed, each with 16 piglets allocated to four treatment groups: germfree (GF), monoassociation with Escherichia coli, monoassociation with Lactobacillus fermentum or conventionalization with faecal bacteria (CV). Enzyme activity and gene expression of lactase phlorizin hydrolase (LPH) and aminopeptidase N (APN) were measured in isolated enterocytes, harvested on day 14, using specific substrates and quantitative PCR respectively. Enterocytes of CV pigs had reduced APN activity, but had increased gene expression relative to GF, making the specific activity:mRNA (A:G) ratio dramatically lower (p < 0.05). Similarly, LPH A:G ratio was significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in enterocytes of CV pigs as compared with GF. The results of co-incubation of L. fermentum, E. coli and faecal bacteria with APN indicate a direct relationship between enzyme inactivation and specific A:G ratio in enterocytes. We conclude that enterocyte up-regulation of APN expression occurs as either a direct response to microbial colonization or as a feedback mechanism in response to reduced enzyme activity through microbial degradation. This mechanism may play a role in ensuring effective competition of the host with the intestinal microbiota for available nutrients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".