MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554710609 · doi:10.2527/jam2016-1627

1627 Molecular physiology of rumen papillae following an acidosis challenge

2016· article· en· W2554710609 on OpenAlexaff
Coral Kent-Dennis, J. Alex Pasternak, G.B. Penner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRumenAcidosisPhysiologyBiologyFood scienceEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effect of ruminal acidosis on transcript abundance and localization of proteins regulated by local inflammation in the ruminal epithelium. Seven ruminally cannulated beef cows were used in a crossover design with two periods and two treatments (acidosis or control). Heifers were fed a baseline TMR with 50:50 forage to concentrate ratio and DMI was recorded daily. The acidosis induction consisted of feed restriction (25% of DMI for 1 d) followed by a grain challenge (30% of baseline DMI) and provision of the full TMR. Ruminal pH was monitored using indwelling probes and ruminal papillae biopsies were collected on d 2 and 6 following the induction of acidosis for RNA extraction and immuno-histofluorescence. Prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase (PTGS1) and PTGS2 facilitate prostaglandin synthesis and were selected as targets because expression is thought to be regulated by inflammation. Gene expression was measured by quantitative real-time PCR, normalized to the geometric mean of three housekeeping genes within period. Immuno-histofluorescence of toll-like receptor (TLR)-9 and TLR-4 were used to evaluate localization in a subset of samples. Statistical analysis was performed using the MIXED procedure of SAS 9.4, with treatment and period as fixed effects. A pH threshold of 5.8 was used to define the occurrence of ruminal acidosis. During the day of the grain challenge, ruminal pH for acidosis cows was below pH 5.8 for 543 min, whereas pH of controls did not fall below the threshold at any time (P = 0.02). Minimum and mean pH were less on the challenge day (min: 5.4 vs. 6.2 ± 0.17 and mean: 5.9 vs. 6.6 ± 0.14, respectively; P < 0.01) for acidosis than control cows. Two days after acidosis induction, transcriptional abundance of PTGS1 and PTGS2 in ruminal papillae were decreased by 1.37 (P = 0.02) and 2.08 (P < 0.01) fold, respectively, relative to controls. When evaluated at d 6, no differences were observed. TLR-9 was not ubiquitously expressed, but rather was concentrated in small areas within regions of the ruminal epithelium. TLR4 was intracellularly expressed in the stratum basale, stratum spinosum, and stratum granulosum regardless of treatment. The results of this study suggest a potential acute anti-inflammatory response following acidosis, which was also tightly regulated. However, the downregulation of PTGS2 was unexpected; related transcripts are being studied to elucidate these effects.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207