Biological Activities of<i>Libidibia (Caesalpinia) ferrea</i>var.<i>parvifolia</i>(Mart. ex Tul.) L. P. Queiroz Pod Preparations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Libidibia ferrea has been used in folk medicine throughout Brazil, and this study evaluated the biological activities of crude extract (CE) as well as a partially purified fraction (F80) obtained from its pods. Results from the MTT assay revealed that only F80 inhibited NCI-H292 cell growth; however, neither CE nor F80 reduced HEp-2 cell growth or sarcoma 180 tumor weight with the in vivo assay. Acute oral toxicity of the extract and fraction was evaluated following the steps of Guideline 423, using female mice; LD(50) for both preparations was determined as 2,500 mg/kg body weight. CE and F80 promoted a reduction of the leukocyte number and nitrite level in inflammatory exudates when the anti-inflammatory assay (carrageenan-induced peritonitis) was performed. CE and F80 inhibited writhing regarding antinociceptive activity (acetic acid-induced writhing response in mice). In conclusion, CE and F80 have no significant cytotoxic or antitumor activities in cell lines showing low toxicity and no action against tumors in vivo. Both preparations revealed anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive activities, corroborating the pharmacological basis of L. ferrea for ethnomedical use.
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 | 0.001 | 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".