Effects of Long-Term Administration of Freeze-Dried Chokeberry Juice to Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polyphenolics can act as prooxidants leading to the generation of reactive oxygen species and electrophilic metabolites which bind to DNA, protein and glutathione. The aim of the present study was to evaluate potential adverse effects of the long-term dietary administration of freeze-dried chokeberry juice to rats.Groups of 8 males and 8 females were exposed via diet to 0; 2; 6; 10 g juice/kg feed for 90 days. Mean food consumption and mean body weight gain of treated animals were comparable with controls. Changes in some hematological parameters were sporadic and non-dose-responsive. Several statistically significant changes in clinical chemistry parameters were considered no toxicologically relevant since they were of small magnitude and lacked correlating findings in histopathology. Histopathological examination did not reveal any changes that could be attributed to chokeberry juice intake. Determination of oxidative damage markers in the liver demonstrated no damage of lipids, proteins and DNA. Chokeberry juice intake improved antioxidant status of rats as evidenced by a decrease in the level of lipid peroxidation, an increase in reduced glutathione concentration and an increase in some antioxidant enzymes activity.It could be concluded that freeze-dried chokeberry juice is safe at doses tested and can be used as a component of food supplements.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".