MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2550650258 · doi:10.2527/jam2016-0705

0705 Effect of milk protein composition on in vivo gastric digestion of a model infant formula

2016· article· en· W2550650258 on OpenAlexaff
Niloufar Rafiee Tari, Ming Fan, Milena Corredig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaseinFood scienceSkimmed milkWhey proteinDigestion (alchemy)ChemistryMealComposition (language)In vivoMicrofiltrationChromatographyInfant formulaBiologyBiochemistryBiotechnologyMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work was to determine the effect of protein composition and, in particular, the presence of whey proteins or b-casein, on the digestion behavior of a model infant formula. An in vivo piglet model was used, as this is an established model for human infants' digestion. Three formulas optimized for piglets were prepared with the same concentration of protein and same caloric content. One formula contained only whey proteins (WP) and two others contained a casein-to-WP ratio of 40:60 but differed in the amount of β-cas. To obtain modified protein ratios, microfiltration (using polyethersulfone membrane with 80 KDa of molecular weight cut-off) was conducted on skimmed milk at either 7 or 22°C. Retentates and permeates were combined with additional whey protein and other ingredients, and after heating, the formulas were used to feed 24 piglets. The piglets were housed and fed from age 3 to 21 d, and animal behavior and health conditions were investigated. The study was performed in two blocks, sacrificing the animals after 60 and 120 min from the last meal. Gastric digesta samples were collected and studied for physicochemical properties. The tests were performed on fresh samples in less than 10 min after euthanizing. There were no differences in the properties of the curd, within a treatment, between the two blocks. All curds showed a shear-thinning behavior, with a significantly higher viscosity and a higher modulus for curds obtained from casein/WP formula, compared with the curds from WP formula. Confocal microscopy showed structures with larger voids in WP digestates, compared with those from cas/WP formula, which showed a higher density throughout the matrix. Despite differences in physicochemical properties, a pH range of 4.4 to 5.8 was measured for the gastric contents, with no significant difference observed between diets or with time of digestion. There were also clear differences in animal growth between treatments. Casein/WP formulas were shown to improve growth performance, with approximately 50% higher average daily growth and increased feed efficiency, compared with the WP formula. The results bring significant advances to our understanding of the importance of different protein ratios on the digestion of dairy matrices.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicInfant Nutrition and Health→French-language works237,207→