Effects of a high vs. low carbohydrate diet on fat and carbohydrate oxidation in cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low or high carbohydrate (CHO) diets (18.9 and 46.3%, LC and HC, respectively) and length of adaptation were investigated in cats ( Felis catus; 10 ± 1 mo, 3 ± 1 kg ) . Cats received each treatment for 14 d in a crossover design and 20 h indirect calorimetry studies were conducted after acute (A; d 0), semi‐chronic (SC; d 4) and chronic (C; d 13) dietary exposure. Data were analyzed by repeated measures ANOVA and Proc Mixed. When cats consumed the HC and LC diet, Ox of the restricted nutrient exceeded intake while Ox of the nutrient in excess matched intake. Mean max energy expenditure (EE) of cats consuming the LC and HC diet were 107 and 102 kcal/kg 0.67 /d and occurred at a mean of 245 and 712 min post feeding, respectfully. Mean max fat (0.90 g/h) and CHO (1.42 g/h) Ox were attained at 26 and 626 min post feeding, respectfully. The changes in Ox and EE suggest that cats adapt to changes in dietary nutrient content, but may require longer than 14 d to adapt to restricted nutrient intake . Supported by: The Procter and Gamble Co., Pet Care, Ohio, USA
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".