Boldine and its antioxidant or health-promoting properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing recognition of the participation of free radical-mediated oxidative events in the initiation and/or progression of cardiovascular, tumoural, inflammatory and neurodegenerative disorders, has given rise to the search for new antioxidant molecules. An important source of such molecules has been plants for which there is an ethno-cultural base for health promotion. An important example of this is boldo (Peumus boldus Mol.), a chilean tree whose leaves have been traditionally employed in folk medicine and is now widely recognized as a herbal remedy by a number of pharmacopoeias. Boldo leaves are rich in several aporphine-like alkaloids, of which boldine is the most abundant one. Research conducted during the early 1990s led to the discovery that boldine is one of the most potent natural antioxidants. Prompted by the latter, a large and increasing number of studies emerged, which have focused on characterizing some of the pharmacological properties that may arise from the free radical-scavenging properties of boldine. The present review attempts to exhaustively cover and discuss such studies, placing particular attention on research conducted during the last decade. Mechanistic aspects and structure-activity data are discussed. The review encompasses pharmacological actions, which arise from its antioxidant properties (e.g., cyto-protective, anti-tumour promoting, anti-inflammatory, anti-diabetic and anti-atherogenic actions), as well as those that do not seem to be associated with such activity (e.g., vasorelaxing, anti-trypanocidal, immuno- and neuro-modulator, cholagogic and/or choleretic actions). Based on the pharmacological and toxicological data now available, further research needs and recommendations are suggested to define the actual potential of boldine for its use in humans.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".