MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595320793 · doi:10.1093/biolreprod/83.s1.187

Nutritional Restriction Prior to Conception in the Sow Alters Embryonic Development and Candidate Gene Expression in the Placenta and Endometrium.

2010· article· en· W2595320793 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Novak, G. Oliver, K. Oxtoby, J. Alex Pasternak, Francois Paradis, Jennifer Patterson, Walter T. Dixon, Michael K. Dyck, G. R. Foxcroft

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyConceptusEndometriumEmbryoAndrologyLitterPlacentaPlacentationEmbryogenesisLactationOvulationUterusGestationFetusEndocrinologyPregnancyInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extent to which maternal nutrition alters placental and fetal development through epigenetic mechanisms, is still uncertain. In an established experimental model using the catabolic primiparous sow, feed restriction during lactation affects embryonic survival and development during the subsequent gestation. In a continuation of these studies, primiparous sows (n=34) were either fully fed (Control:C) or restricted to 60% of voluntary feed intake (Restrict:R) during the third week of a 21-d lactation and re-bred after weaning. Sows were euthanized at d 30 of gestation and reproductive and litter characteristics were recorded. Embryos and placentae (n=488 of each) were collected for each sow, and a sample of endometrium (n=68) was taken from the left and right horn from each sow, frozen immediately in liquid nitrogen and stored at -80°C. Total RNA was extracted from placental, endometrial and embryonic samples collected, DNAse-treated, reverse transcribed, and real-time PCR was used to determine transcript abundance of candidate genes involved in regulating endometrial and placental vascularity and embryonic muscle development. The relative deltaCt values were calculated using cyclophilin as an internal control, and data were analyzed using mixed models analysis with treatment and sex of embryo as independent variables and sow as a random variable. There were no differences in ovulation rate, embryonic survival or number of embryos in utero between C and R sows. However, litter sex ratio was different with more males in the R sows (P<0.05) and embryo weight was reduced (P<0.05) in R compared to C sows. Embryo weight and litter sex ratio were also related to sow weight loss in the previous lactation. When genes regulating vascular development were considered, FGF2 and VEGFA mRNA expression was lower in the endometrium, while ANGPT2 was lower (P<0.05) in the placenta, recovered from R sows. Expression of myogenic regulatory factors analyzed (MYF5, MYF6, MYOG, MYOD1, PAX3, GLI1 and WNT10b) was not different between C and R sows at d 30 of gestation. In addition, the expression of some imprinted genes were examined, and IGF2 expression tended to be higher (P=0.059) and INSR expression was higher (P=0.049) in the R embryos, and IGF2R demonstrated a tendency for a sex by treatment interaction (P=0.066) in the placenta. These results confirm that maternal metabolic state prior to conception can adversely affect embryonic size and sex ratio in the next litter. These effects involved expression of genes related to vascular development in the uterus and placenta, and were consistent with the concept of epigenetic regulation of developmentally important genes. (platform)

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 score0.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of ReproductionSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207