MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282840814 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzac065.035

Taste Preference Between Ruminant and Industrial Trans Fat in C57BL/6 Mice Measured With the Automated IntelliCage System

2022· article· en· W4282840814 on OpenAlexaff
Farzad Mohammadi, Nicolas Bertrand, Iwona Rudkowska

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLecithinTasteElaidic acidChemistryFood scienceFatty acidAnimal scienceInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiochemistryBiologyMedicineLinoleic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective is to evaluate the taste preference between water, lecithin, R-TFA and I-TFA (TFAs in lecithin at a ratio of 14:86 (w/w)) nanovesicles measured with the automated IntelliCage system in C57BL/6 mice. We hypothesized that the preference for industrially originated trans-fatty acids (elaidic acid (EA trans 18: 1n-9)) and ruminant trans fatty acids (trans-palmitoleic acid (TPA t16:1 n-7)) -is higher than lecithin (control) and/or water. The objective is to evaluate the taste preference between water, lecithin, R-TFA and I-TFA (TFAs in lecithin at a ratio of 14:86 (w/w)) nanovesicles measured with the automated IntelliCage system in C57BL/6 mice. Twenty-four female C57BL/6 mice were divided into 2 groups in two separate IntelliCages where had ad libitum access to food (Teklad global 18% protein extruded (18% fat)). On week 1, both groups had access to only water (control). On week 2, in cage 1 mice received lecithin and EA and in cage 2 mice received lecithin and TPA. In week 3 mice had access to only water. On weeks 4 and 5, mice had access to EA and TPA where the positions of trans fatty acids were interchanged for week 5 compared to week 4. Water also was added to the cages on week 5. Mice weights were measured for each week. Corner preference was recorded by 1- the number of the times a mouse enters a corner (corners visits), 2- crossing a hole to reach the bottles (nose pokes); and 3-the number of licking the bottles (licks). Differences between total number of licks was assessed by t-test. During week 2, mice preferred either EA (7.6 times) in cage 1 or TPA (7.9 times) in cage 2 over lecithin (P < 0.05). During week 4 in cage 1, the mice drank more EA (3.14 times) compared to TPA (P < 0.05). Oppositely during week 4, in cage 2, mice drank more TPA compared to EA (1,2 times, P < 0.05). After corners were switched for fat solutions in week 5, mice drank TPA 2.66 times more than EA (P < 0.05) and 3.5 times more than water (P < 0.05) in cage 1. Equally in cage 2, mice drank EA 1.44 and 4.4 times more than TPA and water (P < 0.05) in week 5. Results showed mice preferred dietary trans fat, either EA and TPA in equal matter over control and drinking water. Further, mice changed their fat preference (EA to TPA and TPA to EA) when the positions of trans fatty acids in corners were switched; therefore, more analysis needs to be done. NSERC, CMDO.

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)0.000
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 score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207