Plasma metabolomics reveals lower carnitine concentrations in overweight Labrador Retriever dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of overweight is increasing in dogs, but the metabolic events related to this condition are still poorly understood. The purpose of the study was to investigate the postprandial response of plasma metabolites using a meal-challenge test and to identify metabolic variations related to spontaneous overweightness in privately owned dogs. Twenty-eight healthy male intact Labrador Retriever dogs were included, 12 of which were classified as lean (body condition score (BCS) 4–5 on a 9-point scale) and 16 as overweight (BCS 6–8). After an overnight fast (14–17 h), blood samples were collected and dogs were thereafter fed a high-fat meal. Postprandial blood samples were collected hourly four times. Plasma metabolites were identified by nuclear magnetic resonance. Postprandial metabolomes differed from the fasting metabolome in multivariate discriminant analysis (PLS-DA: Q2Y = 0.31–0.63, cross-validated ANOVA: P ≤ 0.00014) Eleven metabolites, all amino acids, contributed to the separations. Carnitine was identified as a metabolite related to overweight (stepwise logistic regression analysis P ≤ 0.03) and overweight dogs had overall lower carnitine response (mixed model repeated measures analysis P = 0.005) than lean dogs. Notably, mean fasting carnitine concentration in overweight dogs (9.4 ± 4.2 µM) was close to a proposed reference limit for carnitine insufficiency. A postprandial amino acid response was detected but no time-dependent variations with regards to body condition groups were found. Lower carnitine concentrations were found in overweight compared to lean dogs. The latter finding could indicate a carnitine insufficiency related to spontaneous adiposity and altered lipid metabolism in overweight dogs in this cohort of otherwise healthy Labrador Retrievers.
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) | 0.001 | 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".