Cardioprotective Effects of Dietary Flaxseed Post-Infarction Are Associated with Changes in MicroRNA Expression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs/miRs) such as miR-1, miR-133a, miR-133b, miR-135a, and miR-29b play a key role in many cardiac pathological remodeling processes, including apoptosis, fibrosis, and arrhythmias, after a myocardial infarction (MI). Dietary flaxseed has demonstrated a protective effect against an MI. The present study was carried out to test the hypothesis that dietary flaxseed supplementation before and after an MI regulates the expression of above-mentioned miRNAs to produce its cardioprotective effect. Animals were randomized after inducing MI by coronary artery ligation into: (a) sham MI with normal chow, (b) MI with normal chow, and (c-e) MI supplemented with either 10% milled flaxseed, or 4.4% flax oil enriched in alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), or 0.44% flax lignan secoisolariciresinol diglucoside. The feeding protocol consisted of 2 weeks before and 8 weeks after the surgery. Dietary flax oil supplementation selectively upregulated the cardiac expression of miR-133a, miR-135a, and miR-29b. The levels of collagen I expression were reduced in the flax oil group. We conclude that miR-133a, miR-135a, and miR-29b are sensitive to dietary flax oil, likely due to its rich ALA content. The cardioprotective effect of flaxseed in an MI could be due to modulation of these miRNAs.
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.
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 it