Effect of Total Starch and Resistant Starch in Commercial Extruded Dog Foods on Gastric Emptying in Non-Racing Sled Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gastric emptying rate (GER) may impact diabetes and obesity in humans and could provide a method to reduce canine weight gain. Starch, the most common source of carbohydrates (CHOs) in pet food, is classified as rapidly or slowly digestible, or resistant to digestion. This study investigated starch source effects in commercial extruded dog foods on the GER of 11 healthy adult Siberian Huskies (5.63±0.72 years; mean±SEM). Test diets were classified as traditional, grain-free, whole-grain, and vegan. Dogs received each diet once, a glucose control twice, and acetaminophen (Ac) as a marker for GER in a randomized, partially-replicated, 6x6 Latin square design. Pre- and post-prandial blood samples were collected at 16 timepoints from -15 to 480 minutes. Serum Ac concentrations were assessed via standard spectrophotometric assays and fitted with a mathematical model to estimate parameters of GER. Data was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA, followed by a Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test when significant (p<0.05). More total emptying (p= 0.0430) occurred at faster rate (p=0.0668) in dogs fed the grain-free diet, which contained the lowest total starch (34.03 ± 0.23%) and highest resistant starch (0.52 ± 0.007%). This research may benefit future diet formulations to reduce the prevalence of canine weight gain.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".