MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2209921998 · doi:10.1111/age.12390

Sequence analysis of three canine adipokine genes revealed an association between <i><scp>TNF</scp></i> polymorphisms and obesity in Labrador dogs

2015· article· en· W2209921998 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Mańkowska, Monika Stachowiak, Aneta Graczyk, Paulina Ciążyńska, Maciej Gogulski, Wojciech Niżański, M. Świtoński

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Genetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipose Tissue and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsAdipokineObesitySNPMissense mutationGeneticsBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismCandidate geneGenePurebredOverweightGenotypeEndocrinologyLeptinBreedMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is an emerging health problem in purebred dogs. Due to their crucial role in energy homeostasis control, genes encoding adipokines are considered candidate genes, and their variants may be associated with predisposition to obesity. Searching for polymorphism was carried out in three adipokine genes (TNF, RETN and IL6). The study was performed on 260 dogs, including lean (n = 109), overweight (n = 88) and obese (n = 63) dogs. The largest cohort was represented by Labrador Retrievers (n = 136). Altogether, 24 novel polymorphisms were identified: 12 in TNF (including one missense SNP), eight in RETN (including one missense SNP) and four in IL6. Distributions of five common SNPs (two in TNF, two in RETN and one in IL6) were further analyzed with regard to body condition score. Two SNPs in the non-coding parts of TNF (c.-40A>C and c.233+14G>A) were associated with obesity in Labrador dogs. The obtained results showed that the studied adipokine genes are highly polymorphic and two polymorphisms in the TNF gene may be considered as markers predisposing Labrador dogs to obesity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal GeneticsSame topicAdipose Tissue and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207