A Diet High in Lipid Soluble Forms of Choline Modulates Gut-Associated Immune Function in Sprague-Dawley Dams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oral tolerance is the state of unresponsiveness to dietary antigens that are not harmful to the host, a process that begins in the gut and influences both local and peripheral immune responses. Lipid soluble forms of choline have been shown to beneficial affect peripheral immune responses during pregnancy and lactation, yet little is known about the impact of the different choline forms on the gut-associate lymphoid tissue (GALT). Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of feeding buttermilk-derived choline forms on the GALT in lactating dams. Sprague-Dawley dams were randomized to consume one of three diets, all containing 1.9 g/kg of total choline: 1-Control (100% free choline (FC)), 2-Buttermilk (37% phosphatidylcholine (PC), 34% sphingomyelin, 17% glycerophosphocholine (GPC), 7% FC, 5% phosphocholine) and 3-Placebo (50% PC, 25% FC, 25% GPC). Immune cell phenotypes of mesenteric lymph nodes (MLN) and Peyer's patches (PP) were measured by flow cytometry. Ex vivo cytokine production by immune cells isolated from MLN stimulated with Concanavalin A (ConA) and Ovalbumin (OVA) was measured by ELISA. In MLN, dams from the buttermilk and placebo groups had a higher production of IL-10 after both ConA and OVA stimulation and a higher proportion of helper T cells expressing co-inhibitory marker (CD4+CD152+) when compared to the control diet (both P < 0.05). No changes were found in IL-2, TNF-α, or IL-6 production and the proportion of regulatory T cells (CD3+CD4+CD25+FoxP3+) among groups. In PP, dams from the buttermilk group had a higher proportion of CD45RA + cells (B cells) compared to both the placebo and control diets and dams from the placebo diet had a higher proportion of dendritic cells (DC, OX62+OX6+) compared to both the buttermilk and control diets (both P < 0.05). Compared to the control diet (only FC), the buttermilk and placebo diets appear to beneficially modulate oral tolerance by increasing the production of IL-10 (an important mediator) and could be partially explain by the higher proportion of CD4+CD152+cells in MLN. In PP, the higher proportion of B cells in the buttermilk and DC in the placebo groups, suggests that dams from these groups may have better antigen presentation function, which may further assist the induction of oral tolerance. Dairy Farmers of Canada, NSERC, CONACYT.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".