MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Both low and high fat diets inconsistently induce obesity in C57BL/6J mice and obesity compromises adipose n‐3 fatty acid and zinc status

2008· article· en· W69344523 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carla G. Taylor, Diana L. Tallman, Amy Noto

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdipose tissueObesityZincFatty acidInternal medicineEndocrinologyComposition (language)Diet-induced obeseChemistryBiologyMedicineFood scienceBiochemistryInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the inconsistency in development of diet induced obesity (DIO) in C57BL/6J mice is related to dietary fat level, or metabolic derangements associated with high weight gain, including variations in adipose tissue fatty acid composition and zinc status. C57BL/6J mice were randomized to either the low fat (LF; 7% soybean oil w/w, 16% kcal from fat) or high fat (HF; 9% soybean oil + 21% lard w/w, 55% kcal from fat) diet for 16 weeks. The diets were also controlled for zinc content. Mice were dichotomized by median weight into high (HBW) and low body weight (LBW) groups. The novel findings were that (i) even a LF diet produced obesity as HBW and LBW groups contained mice fed both HF and LF diets, (ii) adipose phospholipid n‐3 fatty acids were lower in HBW mice, despite diet composition, and (iii) HBW mice had lower concentrations of zinc in adipose and pancreatic tissue. These results suggest that DIO in C57BL/6J mice is not entirely dependent on a HF diet and that obesity, regardless of diet, results in an unfavourable adipose phospholipid n‐3 fatty acid and zinc status. [Supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and University of Manitoba Research Development Fund.]

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207