POTENTIAL ANTIOXIDATIVE EFFECTS OF CACTUS PEAR FRUIT (<i>OPUNTIA FICUS‐INDICA</i>) EXTRACT ON RADICAL SCAVENGING AND DNA DAMAGE REDUCTION IN HUMAN PERIPHERAL LYMPHOCYTES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Cactus pear fruit (Opuntia ficus‐indica) extract (CPFE) was investigated for its antioxidative and DNA damage reduction using electron spin resonance spectroscopy and comet assays on human peripheral lymphocytes, respectively. Scavenging of 1,1‐diphenyl‐2‐picrylhydrazyl adducts by CPFE at 0.125, 0.25 and 0.5 mg/mL was 32.5, 56.7 and 71.6%, respectively. CPFE at 0.25 and 0.5 mg/mL scavenged 19.2 and 63.6% of 5,5‐dimethyl‐1‐pyrroline N‐oxide‐OH adducts. Alkyl radical scavenging effect of CPFE at 0.0625, 0.125, 0.25 and 0.5 mg/mL was 38.0, 42.4, 67.5 and 78.8%, respectively. CPFE reduced the H2O2‐induced DNA damage in lymphocytes (CPFE at 0.1 mg/mL totally inhibited the damage). The data demonstrate that both antioxidative and DNA damage‐reduction activities are increased with increasing CPFE dosage. These results demonstrate the antioxidative and DNA damage‐reducing efficacy of CPFE constituents as potential sources of raw material for pharmaceutical and functional food industries.
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 | 0.000 | 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".