Effect of supplementation with select human milk oligosaccharides on artificially reared newborn rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Early life nutrition fundamentally influences neonatal development and health. Human milk oligosaccharides (HMO) are key components of breast milk but not standard infant formula that support the establishment of the newborn gut microbiota. Using an artificial rearing system, our objective was to test the effect of two HMO on the whole body and organ growth, adiposity, glucose tolerance and faecal microbiota in young rat pups. From postnatal days 4 to 21, Sprague–Dawley rats were randomised to receive one of: (1) CTR (rat milk substitute); (2) 2′FL (CTR + 1·2 g/l 2′-fucosyllactose); (3) 3′SL (CTR + 1·2 g/l 3′-sialyllactose) and (4) 2′FL + 3′SL (CTR + 0·6 g/l 2′-FL + 0·6 g/l 3′-SL). Body weight (BW), bowel movements and food intake were monitored daily, faecal samples collected each week and oral glucose tolerance, body composition and organ weight measured at weaning. No significant differences were observed between groups in growth performance, body composition, organ weight and abundance of dominant faecal microbes. A decreased relative abundance of genusProteusin week 1 faecal samples andTerrisporobacterin week 3 faecal samples (P< 0·05) was suggestive of a potential pathogen inhibitory effect of 3′SL. Longitudinal changes in the faecal microbiota of artificially reared suckling rats were primarily governed by age (P= 0·001) and not affected by the presence of 2′-FL and/or 3′-SL in rat milk substitutes (P= 0·479). Considering the known protective effects of HMO, further investigation of supplementation with these and other HMO in models of premature birth, extremely low BW or malnutrition may show more pronounced outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".