Component
Subcutaneous adipose vitamin D3 content
Study-defined Subcutaneous adipose vitamin D3 content. Read each linked record for species, exposure and endpoint.
1 recorded relationships. Experimental role, claim status and evidence remain attached to each record.
How nutrients influence it
Every nutrient with a recorded effect on this component, credited to the nutrient that acted rather than the chapter that recorded it. Open a nutrient to see the findings and the conditions they were measured under.
Other things that act on it
Enzymes, hormones, genes, and other components with a recorded effect. These are not nutrients, so they do not count toward the arrows above. Each finding names the chapter that recorded it.
How nutrients reach it in more than one step
Chains of two or more recorded steps that end here, grouped by the nutrient they start from. Each step is a separate finding, so a chain is a route a mechanism could take, not proof that it does.
Tracing routes…
What it does
Every recorded relationship this component is part of, grouped by its role. Plain wording comes first; the technical statement follows.
What acts on it
Subcutaneous adipose content of the administered D3 increased by 104 micrograms/kg.
Experimental context and source evidence
- cross_nutrient
- false
- experimental_model
- Single-blind randomized D2/D3 comparison in 33 adults; weekly dosing for 12 weeks
- exposure
- D2 or D3 50, 000 IU orally each week for 12 weeks.
- limitations
- This weekly regimen and marker response do not establish a universal conversion factor or superiority for every clinical endpoint. This is vitamer-specific content, not the disputed total-fat unit in the abstract.
- nutrient_topic
- Vitamin D2 and D3 research collection; topical membership is not evidence of a direct dietary effect. · Vitamin D2 and D3
- organism
- Homo sapiens
- plain_language
- The administered form was also measured in fat tissue.
- primary_references
- [heaney2011] Vitamin D(3) is more potent than vitamin D(2) in humans. (2011). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21177785/ DOI: 10.1210/jc.2010-2230
- tissue_or_cell_type
- Subcutaneous adipose tissue
Vitamin D2 and D3: mechanisms, deficiency and nutrient interactions (2026-09-17) · lines 1340–1351
AI-assisted literature curation; primary study URLs and scope retained in the document and extraction. Not publisher full text. · supports · Single-blind randomized D2/D3 comparison in 33 adults; weekly dosing for 12 weeks · source_derived_draft · unverified_draft
### vd-heaney-fat-d3 Subcutaneous adipose content of the administered D3 increased by 104 micrograms/kg. Condition category: normal nutrient_topic: Vitamin D2 and D3 research collection; topical membership is not evidence of a direct dietary effect. plain_language: The administered form was also measured in fat tissue. organism: Homo sapiens tissue_or_cell_type: Subcutaneous adipose tissue experimental_model: Single-blind randomized D2/D3 comparison in 33 adults; weekly dosing for 12 weeks limitations: This weekly regimen and marker response do not establish a universal conversion factor or superiority for every clinical endpoint. This is vitamer-specific content, not the disputed total-fat unit in the abstract. exposure: D2 or D3 50, 000 IU orally each week for 12 weeks. cross_nutrient: false [heaney2011] Vitamin D(3) is more potent than vitamin D(2) in humans. (2011). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21177785/ DOI: 10.1210/jc.2010-2230
Complete structured claim and evidence
The events it takes part in
A mechanism often involves more than two components. These are the full events, with every participant and its role.
Situations it appears in
Low-supply and faulty-machinery situations recorded in the chapters where this component plays a part.
In the sources
Preserved passages that mention this component, quoted exactly. Open one to read it in context.
Open hypotheses
Proposed ideas that involve this component. They are labeled as hypotheses and do not change any recorded statement.
This is a research prototype built from draft material. It is not medical advice, and its statements still await verification against the original studies.