MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969323277 · doi:10.3390/nu11091993

Calorie Restriction Modulates Reproductive Development and Energy Balance in Pre-Pubertal Male Rats

2019· article· en· W2969323277 on OpenAlexafffund
Guilherme Rizzoto, Deepa L. Sekhar, Jacob C. Thundathil, Prasanth K. Chelikani, John P. Kastelic

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipose Tissue and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsCalorie restrictionEnergy balanceCaloric theoryBiologyEndocrinologyBalance (ability)Internal medicineMedicinePhysiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective was to determine effects of feed restriction and refeeding on reproductive development and energy balance in pre-pubertal male rats. Sprague Dawley rats (n = 32, 24 days old, ~65 g), were randomly allocated into four treatments (n = 8/treatment): (1) Control (CON, ad libitum feed; (2) Mild Restriction (MR, rats fed 75% of CON consumption); (3) Profound Restriction (PR, 50% of CON consumption); or (4) Refeeding (RF, 50% restriction for 14 days, and then ad libitum for 7 days). Feed restriction delayed reproductive development and decreased energy balance and tissue accretion, with degree of reproductive and metabolic dysfunctions related to restriction severity. In RF rats, refeeding largely restored testis weight, sperm production (per gram and total), plasma IGF-1, leptin and insulin concentrations and energy expenditure, although body composition did not completely recover. On Day 50, more CON and RF rats than PR rats were pubertal (5/6, 4/5 and 1/6, respectively; plasma testosterone >1 ng/mL) with the MR group (4/6) not different. Our hypothesis was supported: nutrient restriction of pre-pubertal rats delayed reproductive development, induced negative energy balance and decreased metabolic hormone concentrations (commensurate with restriction), whereas short-term refeeding after profound restriction largely restored reproductive end points and plasma hormone concentrations, but not body composition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicAdipose Tissue and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207