Influence of maternal nutrition and one-carbon metabolites supplementation on bovine antimicrobial peptides in fetal and maternal tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Maternal nutrition during pregnancy critically influences offspring development and immune function. One-carbon metabolites (OCM) are epigenetic modifiers that may modulate antimicrobial peptide (AMP) expression, which is vital for innate immunity. This study investigated the effects of maternal nutrient restriction and OCM supplementation on mRNA expression of AMP in fetal and maternal lung, mammary gland, and small intestine of beef cattle. Methods Twenty-nine crossbred Angus beef heifers were synchronized for estrus and artificially inseminated. They were assigned to one of four treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design: nutritional plane [control (CON) vs. restricted (RES)] and OCM supplementation [without OCM (−OCM) or with OCM (+OCM)]. Heifers on the CON diet were fed to gain 0.45 kg/day, while RES heifers were fed to lose 0.23 kg/day. Treatments were applied from day 0 to 63 of gestation, after which all heifers were fed a common diet to gain 0.45 kg/day until day 161 of gestation, when samples were collected. Quantitative RT-qPCR was used to assess mRNA expression of AMP. Results Nutritional plane had no effect (p ≥ 0.24) on mRNA expression of AMP in either the fetus or dams. However, the mRNA expression of cathelicidin5 (CATHL5; p = 0.07) and bovine neutrophil β-defensin5 (BNBD5; p = 0.07) in the fetal lung and mammary gland, respectively, was lower in the +OCM groups compared to the −OCM groups. In the maternal small intestine, the expression of enteric β-defensin (EBD) was lower (p = 0.01) in the +OCM groups compared to the −OCM groups. Additionally, in the maternal lung, there was a tendency (p = 0.06) for an interaction in CATHL5 mRNA expression, with the RES + OCM group showing greater expression compared to the CON + OCM (p = 0.07) and RES − OCM (p = 0.08) groups. Discussion Our findings suggest that while restricted maternal nutrition did not affect mRNA expression of AMP, OCM supplementation modulated AMP expression in both fetal and maternal tissues. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying OCM’s impact on AMP expression.
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".