Experimental evidence that EPA and DHA are dietary requirements in a migratory shorebird, but they do not affect muscle oxidative capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary n-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs) are hypothesized to be natural doping agents in migratory shorebirds, enabling prolonged flight by increasing membrane fluidity and oxidative capacity of the flight muscles. Animals can obtain n-3 LCPUFAs from the diet or by conversion of dietary α-linolenic acid, 18:3 n-3. However, the capacity to meet n-3 LCPUFA requirements from 18:3 n-3 varies among species. Direct tests of muscle oxidative enhancement and fatty acid conversion capacity are lacking in marine shorebirds that evolved eating diets rich in n-3 LCPUFAs. We tested whether the presence and type of dietary fatty acids influence the fatty acid composition and flight muscle oxidative capacity in western sandpipers (Calidris mauri). Sandpipers were fed diets low in n-3 PUFAs, high in 18:3 n-3, or high in n-3 LCPUFAs. Dietary fatty acid composition was reflected in multiple tissues, and low intake of n-3 LCPUFAs decreased the abundance of these fatty acids in all tissues, even with a high intake of 18:3 n-3. This suggests that 18:3 n-3 cannot replace n-3 LCPUFAs, and dietary n-3 LCPUFAs are required for sandpipers. Flight muscle indicators of enzymatic oxidative capacity and regulators of lipid metabolism did not change. However, the n-3 LCPUFA diet was associated with increased FAT/CD36 mRNA expression, potentially benefitting fatty acid transport during flight. Our study suggests that flight muscle lipid oxidation is not strongly influenced by n-3 PUFA intake. The type of dietary n-3 PUFA strongly influences the abundance of n-3 LCPUFAs in the body and could still impact whole-animal performance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".