MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564595245 · doi:10.1113/jp273471

Consequences of maternal omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation on respiratory function in rat pups

2016· article· en· W2564595245 on OpenAlexafffund
Luana Tenorio Lopes, Cécile Baldy, Alexandra Jochmans‐Lemoine, O. Mercier, Olivier Pothier‐Piccinin, Tommy Seaborn, Vincent Joseph, Isabelle Marc, Richard Kinkead

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPolyunsaturated fatty acidRespiratory systemEndocrinologyInternal medicineHypoxia (environmental)RespirationBiologyMedicinePhysiologyFatty acidChemistryBiochemistryOxygenAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points Incomplete development of the neural circuits that control breathing contributes to respiratory disorders in pre‐term infants. Manifestations include respiratory instability, prolonged apnoeas and poor ventilatory responses to stimuli. Based on evidence suggesting that omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n‐3 PUFA) improves brain development, we determined whethern‐3 PUFA supplementation (via the maternal diet) improves respiratory function in 10–11‐day‐old rat pups. n‐3 PUFA treatment prolonged apnoea duration but augmented the relative pulmonary surface area and the ventilatory response to hypoxia. During hypoxia, the drop in body temperature measured in treated pups was 1 °C less than in controls.n‐3 PUFA treatment also reduced microglia cell density in the brainstem. Although heterogeneous, the results obtained in rat pups constitute a proof of concept thatn‐3 PUFA supplementation can have positive effects on neonatal respiration. This includes a more sustained hypoxic ventilatory response and a decreased respiratory inhibition during laryngeal chemoreflex. Abstract Most pre‐term infants present respiratory instabilities and apnoeas as a result of incomplete development of the neural circuits that control breathing. Because omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n‐3 PUFA) benefit brain development, we hypothesized thatn‐3 PUFA supplementation (via the maternal diet) improves respiratory function in rat pups. Pups receivedn‐3 PUFA supplementation from an enriched diet (13 g kg−1ofn‐3 PUFA) administered to the mother from birth until the experiments were performed (postnatal days 10–11). Controls received a standard diet (0.3 g kg−1ofn‐3 PUFA). Breathing was measured in intact pups at rest and during hypoxia (FiO2 = 0.12; 20 min) using whole body plethysmography. The duration of apnoeas induced by stimulating the laryngeal chemoreflex (LCR) was measured under anaesthesia. Lung morphology was compared between groups. Maternaln‐3 PUFA supplementation effectively raisedn‐3 PUFA levels above control levels both in the blood and brainstem of pups. In intact, resting pups,n‐3 PUFA increased the frequency and duration of apnoeas, especially in females. During hypoxia,n‐3 PUFA supplemented pups hyperventilated 23% more than controls; their anapyrexic response was 1 °C less than controls. In anaesthetized pups,n‐3 PUFA shortened the duration of LCR‐induced apnoeas by 32%. The relative pulmonary surface area ofn‐3 PUFA supplemented pups was 12% higher than controls. Althoughn‐3 PUFA supplementation augments apnoeas, there is no clear evidence of deleterious consequences on these pups. Based on the improved lung architecture and responses to respiratory challenges, this neonatal treatment appears to be beneficial to the offspring. However, further experiments are necessary to establish its overall safety.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207