MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrative transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic analyses yields insights into muscle fiber type in cattle

2024· article· en· W4405364282 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaofan Tan, Ruixue Zhao, Jing Chen, Zhiwei Yan, Xin Sui, Heling Li, Qiao Li, Xuehai Du, Yangzhi Liu, Ying Yang, David M. Irwin, Bojiang Li, Shuyi Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Chemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetabolomicsTranscriptomeComputational biologyBiologyFiberMuscle fibreChemistryBioinformaticsBiochemistryGeneAnatomyGene expressionSkeletal muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muscle fiber is an important factor in beef quality. Here, we compared fast-type longissimus dorsi muscle and slow-type psoas major muscle from cattle using transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic analyses. A total of 1717 differentially expressed genes (DEGs), 297 differentially abundant proteins (DAPs) and 193 differentially abundant metabolites (DAMs) were identified between LD and PM tissue, respectively. For verification, we selected 10 DEGs for qRT-PCR and 6 DAPs for western blotting, and showed they were consistent between the two approaches. GO and KEGG enrichment analyses revealed that some DEGs, DAPs and DAMs were enriched in muscle fiber type-associated GO terms and pathways. Many of them are involved in glycolysis, TCA and fatty acid metabolism. Integrated multi-omics analysis showed a correlation coefficient of 0.6244 between the transcriptome and proteome. This study provides a new understanding of molecular mechanisms involved in the determination of bovine muscle fiber type and meat quality.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood ChemistrySame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207