A comparison of the capacity of six cold-pressed plant oils to support development of acquired immune competence in the weanling mouse: superiority of low-linoleic-acid oils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this investigation was to compare, at several levels of intake, the capacity of diverse cold-pressed plant oils to support development of acquired immune competence assessed in vivo in the weanling mouse. Safflower, maize, soyabean, rapeseed, flaxseed and olive oils were selected to represent widely differing 18 : 1n-9, 18 : 2n-6 and 18 : 3n-3 contents, and each oil was fed at three dietary levels (40, 80 and 160 g/kg) as the exclusive source of fat. C57BL/6J mice, ten males and ten females, had free access to each diet for 28 d beginning at 19 d of age. The primary serum haemagglutinin response to sheep red blood cells and the primary cutaneous delayed hypersensitivity response to dinitrochlorobenzene were used to assess humoral and cell-mediated competence respectively, on day 28. A zero-time control group, assessed immunologically at 19 d of age, was also included (n 32). Independently of dietary oil level, flaxseed, rapeseed, olive and soyabean oils supported development of a more vigorous antibody response than safflower (a useful point of reference, being rich in 18 : 2n-6 but low in 18 : 1n-9 and 18 : 3n-3), whereas only flaxseed oil supported development of cell-mediated responsiveness exceeding that of safflower-fed mice. Independently of oil type, development of both immunological indices correlated negatively with intake of 18 : 2n-6, and development of humoral competence varied inversely with dietary oil level. A low content of 18 : 2n-6, perhaps less than 20 g/100 g fatty acids, appears important to the capacity of a plant oil to support development of acquired immune competence in the young.
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) | 0.000 | 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".