MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293839207 · doi:10.1080/19490976.2015.1127481

Different Th17 immunity in gut, liver, and adipose tissues during obesity: the role of diet, genetics, and microbes

2016· article· en· W2293839207 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph F. Cavallari, Emmanuel Denou, Kevin P. Foley, Waliul I. Khan, Jonathan D. Schertzer

Bibliographic record

VenueGut Microbes · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyImmune systemImmunityInsulin resistanceGut floraAdipose tissueInflammationObesityDysbiosisImmunologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbes modify immunometabolism responses linking obesity and type 2 diabetes. Immunity helps maintain a host-microbe symbiosis, but inflammation can promote insulin resistance in tissues that control blood glucose. We were interested in compartmentalization of immune responses during obesity and show here that feeding mice an obesity-causing high-fat diet (HFD) decreased a marker of neutrophil activation and cytokines related to Th17 responses in the gut. A HFD decreased IL-17 and IL-21/22 in the ileum and colon, respectively. A HFD increased IL-17, IL-21/22 and other related Th17 responses in the liver. At the whole tissue level, there is divergence in gut and metabolic tissue Th17 cytokines during diet-induced obesity. Deletion of the bacterial peptidoglycan sensor NOD2 had relatively minor effects on these immune responses. We propose a model where diet-induced obesity promotes a permissive gut immune environment and sets the stage for host genetics to contribute to dysbiosis-driven metabolic tissue inflammation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGut MicrobesSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207