Sequential Feeding of Lipid Supplement Enriches Beef Adipose Tissues with 18:3n‐3 Biohydrogenation Intermediates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was designed to determine if feeding steers extruded flaxseed and hay (25 and 75%; DM basis) together as a total mixed ration (TMR), or sequentially (non-TMR) would result in different enrichments of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and their biohydrogenation intermediates (BHI) in beef adipose tissues [subcutaneous (SC) vs perirenal (PR) fat]. Forty-eight Angus cross steers (325 ± 16 kg) were stratified by weight to six pens, and pens were randomized to either TMR or non-TMR and fed ad libitum for an average of 242 days. The concentrations of α-linolenic acid increased by 18 mol% in both SC and PR in non-TMR steers compared to TMR steers (P < 0.01). trans 18:1 isomers were more concentrated in PR than SC (14.4 vs 9.5 mol%; P < 0.01) and increased by 10 mol% in both fat depots for non-TMR (P < 0.01). Other BHI including non-methylene-interrupted 18:2 (atypical dienes), conjugated linoleic acids and conjugated linolenic acids (CLnA) were affected by diet × tissue interactions (P < 0.01). The CLnA and CLA contents were higher in both fat depots when feeding the non-TMR, but the effect of diet was more pronounced in PR than in SC (P < 0.01). Atypical dienes were highest in PR from non-TMR and lowest in TMR fed steers (4.3 and 3.6 mol%) with SC contents being intermediate. The sequential feeding of lipid supplement can thus profoundly affect the enrichment of PUFA and their BHI in beef fat and their differentially enrichment is also fat depot dependant.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".