Whey protein supplementation increases methionine intake but not homocysteine plasma concentration in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of whey protein supplementation on homocysteine (Hcy) metabolism and liver oxidative stress in rats. Twenty-four rats were divided into 3 groups (n = 8) to receive one of the following diets for 4 weeks: control diet (C), whey protein-composed diet (WP), and whey protein-supplemented diet (WPS). The C and WP diets consisted of AIN-93 with 20% casein and 20% whey protein as protein source, respectively. WPS was AIN-93 (20% casein) supplemented by the addition of 20% (w/w) whey protein. Four weeks of ingesting a WPS diet resulted in a significantly higher (P < 0.05) total protein and methionine intakes. Although a significant increase (P < 0.05) in the hepatic S-adenosylmethionine and S-adenosylhomocysteine levels occurred in WPS group compared with C and WP, no significant change was observed in plasma Hcy concentration between groups. Furthermore, the levels of lipid hydroperoxides and advanced oxidation protein products, known liver oxidative stress markers, were increased in the WPS group compared with the C group. In addition, no change in glutathione liver concentration was observed in any of the groups studied. In conclusion, whey protein supplementation increases methionine intake substantially; however, it does not change plasma Hcy concentrations. On the other hand, increased hepatic oxidative stress markers were observed in whey protein supplemented rats were probably due to high protein intake.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".