Red blood cells are superior to plasma for predicting subcutaneous trans fatty acid composition in beef heifers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trans (t)-18:1 content in beef has become more of interest as partially hydrogenated vegetable oils are removed from foods. Predicting t-18:1 early in the feeding period would be useful if limitations are put on t-18:1 in beef. To determine which blood component is better related to backfat, proportions of t10-18:1 and t11-18:1 (vaccenic acid) were measured in heifer red blood cells (RBC) and plasma (N = 14) after 0, 28, 56, and 76 d on a barley-grain-based diet, and correlated with post-slaughter subcutaneous fat (SCF). Total t-18:1 declined in both RBC and plasma during late finishing (P < 0.05). At 28 d, t11-18:1 decreased and t10-18:1 increased in RBC and plasma (P < 0.05). By 76 d, t10-18:1 declined to 0 d levels. RBC and plasma t-18:1 compositions were highly correlated (t10-18:1, r ≥ 0.7, P ≤ 0.02; t11-18:1, r ≥ 0.51, P ≤ 0.06). Correlations with post-slaughter backfat were, however, consistently greater for RBC compared with plasma. The use of RBC t-18:1 composition may, therefore, be superior to plasma for predicting t-18:1 in SCF, and the length of finishing could be useful for manipulating t-18:1 in beef. The time required for changes in t18:1 in RBC to reflect in changes in SCF still, however, needs to be determined to establish optimal durations for beneficial modification.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".