Parental dietary sucrose affects metabolic and antioxidant enzyme activities in <i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The influence of parental nutrition as a key environmental factor that can influence offspring performance has become a hot topic for modern investigations. In the current study using fruit flies, Drosophila melanogaster, we found the sucrose concentration of the diet in the parental generation had a significant influence on the metabolism and antioxidant defense of the next generation, even when that subsequent generation had been shifted to a standard diet. We found that low concentrations of dietary carbohydrate in the parental generation led to higher activities of lactate dehydrogenase, malate dehydrogenase (MDH) and alanine transaminase (ALT) enzymes and increased urea content in their progeny. Moreover, higher activities of the first‐ and second‐line antioxidant defense enzymes were detected in F1 males generated from parents fed a low‐carbohydrate diet. Low sucrose concentration in the parental diet resulted in increased levels of protein thiols but decreased the low‐molecular‐weight thiol group content in F1 males. The influence of different dietary sucrose concentrations also resulted in sex‐dependent differences, where MDH, ALT, glutathione‐S‐transferase, glucose‐6‐phosphate dehydrogenase and isocitrate dehydrogenase activities and levels of thiol groups were unaffected in F1 females. The results highlight the transgenerational influence that specific dietary macronutrients provided in the parental diet, namely carbohydrates, can have on the next generation, influencing enzyme activities, metabolic pathways and antioxidant defenses in progeny Drosophila.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".