Breed dependent regulatory mechanisms of beneficial and non-beneficial fatty acid profiles in subcutaneous adipose tissue in cattle with divergent feed efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aimed to determine whether breed and feed efficiency affect the molecular mechanisms regulating beneficial and non-beneficial fatty acid profiles in subcutaneous adipose tissue of beef steers. Fatty acid profiling and RNA-Seq based transcriptome analysis were performed on subcutaneous adipose tissues collected from beef steers with three divergent breeds (Angus, ANG, n = 47; Charolais, CHAR, n = 48; Kinsella Composite, KC, n = 48) and different residual feed intake (RFI, a measure of feed efficiency). The comparison of fatty acid profiles showed that KC had higher beneficial FAs compared to the other two breeds. Distinct FA profiles between H-RFIfat and L-RFIfat steers was more obvious for KC steers, where H-RFIfat steers tended to have higher proportion of healthy FAs and lower proportion of the unhealthy FAs. A higher number of differentially expressed (DE) genes were observed for KC steers, whereas ANG and CHAR steers had a lower number of DE genes between H- and L-RFIfat steers. The association analyses of the gene expressions and FA profiles showed that 10 FA metabolism-associated genes together with the one upstream regulator (SREBF1) were associated with the proportion of C18:2n-6, total n-6, PUFA and PUFA/SFA for KC steers but not the other two breeds. Subcutaneous adipose tissue FA profiles and healthy FA index differed in cattle with divergent feed efficiency and such variation was unique for the three examined cattle breeds. Key FA metabolism-associated genes together with SREBF1 which is the upstream regulator of a set of genes involved in lipid metabolism may be of importance for genetic selection of meat with higher healthy FA index in beef cattle.
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".