MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1886610281 · doi:10.1139/cjas2012-024

SHORT COMMUNICATION: Effect of silymarin (Silybum marianum) treatment on prolactin concentrations in cyclic sows

2013· article· en· W1886610281 on OpenAlexaff
Florence Loisel, Hélène Quesnel, C. Farmer

Bibliographic record

VenueBioOne Complete (BioOne) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSilymarin and Mushroom Poisoning
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilybum marianumMilk ThistleProlactinEstrous cycleLeptinHormoneEndocrinologyChemistryAnimal scienceInternal medicinePharmacologyMedicineBiologyTraditional medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loisel, F., Quesnel, H. and Farmer, C. 2013. Short Communication: Effect of silymarin (Silybum marianum) treatment on prolactin concentrations in cyclic sows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 93: 227-230. An extract (silymarin) from the plant Silybum marianum (milk thistle) was shown to increase circulating concentrations of prolactin in cycling rats. A dose-response study was undertaken to determine if silymarin does have hyperprolactinemic properties in cycling swine. Forty-four weaned sows were allotted to four groups receiving 0, 1, 2 or 4 g d-1 of silymarin over a period of 8 d. Blood samples were obtained on days 1 (first day of treatment starting 24 to 48 h after the onset of the standing estrus), 2, 3, and 9. Prolactin, progesterone, estradiol-17β and leptin concentrations were determined. Silymarin did not increase prolactin concentrations at any of the doses studied, nor did it affect concentrations of the other hormones (P>0.1).

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.046 · 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioOne Complete (BioOne)Same topicSilymarin and Mushroom PoisoningFrench-language works237,207