MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401598435 · doi:10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101361

Human milk oligosaccharides produced by synthetic biology

2024· article· en· W4401598435 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica Bensimon, Xiaonan Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agriculture and Food Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsInfant formulaBacillus subtilisLactoseBiologyBreastfeedingHealth benefitsBiotechnologyHuman healthFood scienceBacteriaMedicineEnvironmental healthPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benefits of human breast milk (HBM) to newborn growth, development, and overall health have been well investigated. As breastfeeding rate has declined significantly, the use of infant formula has risen and remains a significant component of the infant's diet. HBM contains several essential nutritional components, with human milk oligosaccharides (HMO) being the third most abundant following lactose and lipids. A diverse array of HMOs is known to exert great benefits in intestinal, immune, and cognitive functions. In contrast to HBM, infant formula containing mainly bovine milk lacks the diversity of HMOs. Efforts have been made to replicate this characteristic in infant formula through chemical and chemoenzymatic synthesis as well as microbial production. Utilizing microbial hosts appears to be more favourable due to its accessibility and cost-efficiency. Escherichia coli has been preferably used due to its high incorporation of DNA, high-level expression capability, and rapid growth. However, potential endotoxin contamination raises health concerns and prevents approval as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) by the FDA. This prompts the use of other microbes such as Bacillus subtilis . Future research in this area is needed to optimize effective procedures using microbial hosts, high yield production, and economic feasibility. This may lead to infant formulas closely mimicking HBM and its health benefits.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agriculture and Food ResearchSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207