Conjugated linoleic acid protects against appendicular bone loss in orchidectomized middle‐aged guinea pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoporosis in aging men requires sex‐specific interventions. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) increases bone mineral density (BMD) in mice but no study has studied the effect of CLA in advanced aging in males. The objective was to assess the effects of CLA on bone loss in aging by DXA (QDR 4500A, Hologic) and micro computed tomography (μCT; SkyScan 1174). As an advanced aging model, male pigmented guinea pigs (n=40, weight: 1207.0±7.7 g) were randomized at 70 wk of age to: SHAM+Control diet, SHAM+CLA diet (1% c9,t11 CLA 80% pure), orchidectomy (ORX)+Control diet, or ORX+CLA diet. DXA and μCT scans of left tibia (T), femur (F) and L3 vertebra (L3) were performed at 16 wk. Mixed model ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's HSD was used to test for group differences in bone volume fraction (BV/TV) and volumetric BMD (Table 1) as well as trabecular number (Tb.N), thickness (Tb.Th) and separation (Th.Sp). Tb.N was significantly higher in the SHAM+CTRL (T: 0.025±0.001, F: 0.039±0.002) vs. ORX+CTRL (T: 0.019±0.001, F: 0.028±0.002; P=0.01 & 0.004). Tb.Sp of SHAM+CLA (F: 25.39±1.83) was significantly lower than ORX+CTRL (LF: 34.24±2.56, P=0.04). No differences among groups were observed for periosteal and endosteal volume, L3, Tb.Th, and T Th.Sp using μCT or any outcomes by DXA. These data suggest that CLA protects against appendicular bone loss incurred with aging. Since DXA did not reveal group differences for areal BMD it may not be sensitive enough to quantify skeletal response to some dietary interventions. Grant Funding Source : NSERC
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".