MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280623194 · doi:10.1017/s0021859622000223

Further solutions to an isotope dilution model for partitioning phenylalanine and tyrosine between milk protein synthesis and other metabolic fates by the mammary gland of lactating dairy cows

2022· article· en· W4280623194 on OpenAlexafffund
L.A. Crompton, L. A. McKnight, C.K. Reynolds, J.L. Ellis, J. Dijkstra, J. France

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphResearch Canada
FundersCanada Research ChairsDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government
KeywordsPhenylalanineMammary glandIsotope dilutionTyrosineAmino acidMetabolismMilk proteinChemistryBiochemistryDilutionBiologyFood scienceChromatographyMass spectrometryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Phenylalanine (PHE) and to a lesser extent TYR are two commonly used amino acid tracers for measuring protein metabolism in a variety of species and tissues. The model examined in this paper was developed to resolve trans-organ and stable isotope dilution data collected from experiments with lactating dairy cows using these tracers. Two methods of solving the model, i.e. as two four-pool submodels, one representing PHE and the other TYR, or as an integrated eight-pool model, are investigated and the alternative solutions are contrasted. Solving the model as the two four-pool submodels rather than the integrated 8-pool model is preferred as the equations are slightly simpler and their application less susceptible to any compounding of measurement errors. The data used to illustrate the model were taken from experiments conducted to investigate the effects of high and low protein diets on the partitioning of PHE and TYR between milk protein synthesis and other metabolic fates by the mammary gland.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207