Expression of enzymes involved in the urea cycle and muscle and mammary gland development of Holstein × Gyr heifers in a rotational grazing system supplemented with increasing protein levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies evaluating the crude protein (CP) supplementation strategies across the year for grazing cattle and its association with the enzymes involved in the urea cycle and muscle and mammary gland developments are scarce. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the effect of supplementation with different levels of CP on the expression of genes involved in the urea cycle and muscle and mammary gland development of Holstein × Gyr crossbreed heifers grazing intensively managed Brachiaria decumbens throughout the year. Thirty-eight heifers with average initial BW of 172.5 ± 11.15 kg (mean ± SE) and 8.2 ± 0.54 mo of age were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatments: 3 protein supplements (SUP) fed at 5g/kg of body weight, plus a control group (CON, non-supplemented animals). The supplement CP levels evaluated were: 12, 24, and 36%. The study was divided into 4 seasons: rainy, dry, rainy-dry transition (RDT), and dry-rainy transition (DRT). On the penultimate day of each season, ultrasound images of the carcass and mammary gland were taken. Five animals from each treatment were randomly chosen on the last day of each season, and liver and muscle tissue biopsies were performed. The target genes were the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) in the muscle samples. Carbamoyl phosphate synthetase (CPS), ornithine transcarbamylase (OTC), argininosuccinate synthetase (ASS), arginosuccinate lyase (ASL), and arginase (ARG) were evaluated in the liver samples. Data were analyzed using PROC GLIMMIX of the SAS with repeated measures. We observed a greater rib eye area (cm 2 ) and fat thickness (mm) in SUP animals than in non-supplemented animals. However, we did not observe differences among SUP levels for both variables. No effects of supplementation were detected on mammary gland development. Nevertheless, seasonal effects were observed, where the RDT and dry season had the most and least accumulated fat in the mammary gland. In muscle, we observed greater expression of AMPK in non-supplemented animals than SUP animals. On the other hand, no differences were observed in gene expression between SUP and non-supplemented animals and among SUP animals for mTOR. Season affected both AMPK and mTOR; heifers had a greater AMPK gene expression on rainy than RDT. For mTOR, we observed greater gene expression in RDT and DRT than in rainy. No differences were observed among RDT, dry, and DRT, and between dry and rainy seasons for mTOR. We observed greater CPS, ASL, and ARG gene expression in SUP animals than in non-supplemented animals. Among SUP animals, supplement CP linearly affected CPS. In conclusion, the supplementation strategy did not affect mammary gland development and mTOR expression in muscle tissue. However, we observed a seasonal effect on mammary gland development and AMPK and mTOR expression. The CP supplementation increased the rib eye area and fat thickness, directly affecting AMPK expression in the muscle. Moreover, the CP supplementation increased urea cycle enzyme expression, indicating greater urea production in the liver.
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".