Iron-chelating and antioxidant synthetic peptides: Modulating salmon immunity and growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chilean salmon farming still suffers from high mortality rates due to Salmonid Rickettsial Septicemia (SRS) caused by Piscirickettsia salmonis genogroups (LF-89 and EM-90). To modulate fish immunity against bacterial pathogens (without compromising host growth), we investigated the bioactive properties (e.g., iron-chelating or antioxidant activity) of sixteen peptides that were pre-selected from public databases and chemically synthesized following an Fmoc strategy. Then, prior to a four-week small-scale experiment with pre-smolts Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ), two synthetic peptides were chosen based on DPPH-radical scavenging activity, oxygen radical absorbance, antioxidant or iron-chelating function, as well as the modulation of immune-related biomarkers (e.g., ifny , nlrc3 , il1b ) in RTS11 cells or head kidney leukocytes (HKLs) from rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ). Peptides (p4426: antioxidant; p4429: iron-chelating) were microencapsulated and added (at 150 μg kg -1 ) into a commercial-like diet (CD) to produce three other experimental feeds (AD: antioxidant, ID: iron-chelating, AID: p4426 and p4429 at equal concentration). After four weeks of feeding, data showed that fish’s body weight and length increased with ID and AID diets (compared to CD), while ID also increased the number of red blood cells (per mL). Furthermore, HKLs (from fish fed synthetic peptides) stimulated with protein extracts of P. salmonis genogroups (LF-89, EM-90 or a mixture of both) modulated (compared to CD group) innate immune biomarkers such as chemokine il8 and effector molecules (i.e., arg1, sod1 ). Therefore, the use of microencapsulated peptides with iron-chelating or antioxidant activities should be explored as potential feed additives to strengthen host immunity against P. salmonis . • Synthetic peptides demonstrated iron-chelating or antioxidant activity in vitro. • RTS11 cells showed a modulation of innate immune biomarkers by synthetic peptides. • Iron-chelating peptides support short-term fish growth. • HKLs from Atlantic salmon fed synthetic peptides had a modulated response to MAMPs.
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".