Assisted reproduction causes placental maldevelopment and dysfunction linked to reduced fetal weight in mice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compelling evidence indicates that stress in utero, as manifested by low birth weight (LBW), increases the risk of metabolic syndrome in adulthood. Singletons conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART) display a significant increase in LBW risk and ART offspring have a different metabolic profile starting at birth. Here, used mouse as a model, we found that ART resulted in reduced fetal weight and placental overgrowth at embryonic day 18.5 (E18.5). The ART placentae exhibited histomorphological alterations with defects in placental layer segregation and glycogen cells migration at E18.5. Further, ART treatments resulted in downregulation of a majority of placental nutrient transporters and reduction in placental efficiency. Moreover, the ART placentae were associated with increased methylation levels at imprinting control regions of H19, KvDMR1 and disrupted expression of a majority of imprinted genes important for placental development and function at E18.5. Our results from the mouse model show the first piece of evidence that ART treatment could affect fetal growth by disrupting placental development and function, suggests that perturbation of genomic imprinting resulted from embryo manipulation may contribute to these problems.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it