MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402541850 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.882

PSXII-19 Influence of dietary copper concentration and liver sampling location on liver copper concentrations in three breeds (Gulf Coast Native, Suffolk x Hampshire, and Jacob) of sheep

2024· article· en· W4402541850 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Baroni Alves, Huey Yi Loh, Jarvis Scott, Jennifer L. Parsons, Nancy A. Irlbeck, A.L. Fowler, T. E. Engle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsAgribrands Purina (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopperAnimal scienceSampling (signal processing)Veterinary medicineBiologyChemistryMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Male sheep (n = 27) from three different breeds: 1) Gulf Coast Native (GCN; n = 9 wethers), 2) Suffolk x Hampshire (SHC; n = 9 wethers), and 3) Jacob (JCB; n = 9 intact males) approximately 9 mo of age, [body weight (BW) = 38.16 ± 2.43 kg) were stratified by BW and breed into 3 treatment groups to examine the impact of breed, supplemental copper (Cu) dose, and liver sampling location on liver Cu concentrations. On d 0 of the experiment, liver biopsies were collected from 5 sheep per breed and analyzed for Cu concentrations. Animals were housed in individual pens and received 2% of BW of a pelleted concentrate containing the appropriate Cu treatment once daily and hay in amounts to allow ad libitum access to hay over a 24 h period. Treatments consisted of 1) low Cu (LCu; 15.3 mg Cu/kg DM), 2) moderate Cu (MCu; 17.7 mg Cu/kg DM), and 3) high Cu (HCu; 23.8 mg Cu/kg DM) from CuSO4∙5H2O. On d 50 of the experiment, all animals were weighed and transported to an USDA inspected abattoir and harvested. Following harvest, samples were obtained from the left and right lobes of the liver and thoroughly washed with phosphate-buffered saline. All liver samples were dried, ashed, and reconstituted in 5 mL of 1.2 N HCl for Cu analysis. Data were analyzed as a randomized block design using the MIXED procedure in SAS with individual animal as the experimental unit. There was a three-way interaction between breed x treatment x liver lobe (P < 0.04). The right liver lobe in HCu JCB sheep had greater (P < 0.05) Cu concentrations compared with the left liver lobe. Both the left and right lobes of the liver had greater (P < 0.001) Cu concentrations compared with the initial liver Cu concentration in MCu JCB sheep. The right liver lobe of HCu GCN sheep tended (P < 0.07) to have greater liver Cu concentrations compared with the left liver lobe. The Cu concentration in the right liver lobe tended (P < 0.09) to be greater in MCu sheep compared with the left liver lobe. Liver Cu concentrations within the right lobe of HCu GCN sheep were greater (P < 0.05) than liver Cu concentrations in the right and left liver lobe samples in LCu GCN sheep. Liver Cu concentrations in SHC sheep were not influenced by treatment. Future research examining the impact of breed and Cu supplementation on the molecular mechanisms associated with Cu absorption, storage, and excretion is warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207