MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044768000 · doi:10.1139/bcb-2020-0182

Biological activities of commercial bovine lactoferrin sources

2020· article· en· W3044768000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo Lönnerdal, Xiaogu Du, Rulan Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMead Johnson Nutrition
KeywordsLactoferrinWestern blotChemistrySecretionCell growthIn vitroCaco-2PasteurizationBiochemistryBiologyMicrobiologyFood scienceMolecular biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lactoferrin (Lf) samples from several manufacturers were evaluated in vitro. The purity and protein form of each Lf were examined by SDS–PAGE, Western blot, and proteomics analysis. Assays were conducted to evaluate uptake of Lfs and iron from Lfs by enterocytes as well as Lf bioactivities, including effects on intestinal cell proliferation and differentiation, IL-18 secretion, TGF-β1 transcription, and growth of enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC). Composition of the Lfs varies; some only contain a major Lf band (∼80 kDa), and some also contain minor forms. All Lfs and iron from the Lfs were absorbed by Caco-2 cells, with various efficiencies. The bioactivities of the Lfs varied considerably, but there was no consistent trend. All Lfs promoted intestinal cell proliferation, secretion of IL-18, and transcription of TGF-β1. Some Lfs exhibited pro-differentiation effects on Caco-2 cells. Effects of pasteurization (62.5 °C for 30 min, 72 °C for 15 s, or 121 °C for 5 min) on integrity, uptake, and bioactivities were examined using Dicofarm, Tatua, and native bovine Lfs. Results show that pasteurization did not affect protein integrity, but variously affected uptake of Lf and its effects on intestinal proliferation, differentiation, and EPEC growth. To choose a Lf source for a clinical trial, assessment of bioactivities is recommended.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207