MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160374605 · doi:10.3390/ani11051464

The Binding of Free and Sulfated Androstenone in the Plasma of the Boar

2021· article· en· W3160374605 on OpenAlexafffund
Christine Bone, E. James Squires

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAndrostenoneBoar taintBOAREndocrinologyInternal medicineChemistrySkatoleBiologyBiochemistryAnimal scienceMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Androstenone circulates in the plasma bound to albumin before accumulating in the fat, resulting in the development of boar taint. Androstenone sulfate is more abundant in the circulation than free androstenone; however, it is unclear how androstenone sulfate is transported in the plasma and if steroid transport affects the development of boar taint. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize the binding of androstenone sulfate in boar plasma and determine if variability in steroid binding affects the accumulation of androstenone in the fat. [3H]-androstenone sulfate was incubated with plasma and the steroid binding was quantified using gel filtration chromatography. Inter-animal variability was assessed by quantifying androstenone binding specificity in plasma obtained from boars that had high or low fat androstenone concentrations at slaughter. Androstenone sulfate bound minimally in the plasma and to isolated albumin, which suggests that it is transported primarily in solution. The specific binding of androstenone quantified in plasma and isolated albumin from low fat androstenone animals was significantly higher (p = 0.01) than in high fat androstenone boars. These results indicate that the binding of androstenone to albumin varies amongst individual animals and affects the transport of androstenone in the plasma and accumulation in the fat of the boar.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207