MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030065493 · doi:10.1177/1091581810388307

Effects in Rats of Maternal Exposure to Raspberry Leaf and Its Constituents on the Activity of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes in the Offspring

2010· article· en· W2030065493 on OpenAlexafffund
Emilija Makaji, Shirley Ho, Alison C. Holloway, Denis Crankshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Toxicology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster University
KeywordsOffspringBiotransformationKaempferolCytochrome P450BiologyEllagic acidQuercetinWeaningCYP1B1EnzymePhysiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyPregnancyBiochemistryAntioxidantMedicinePolyphenol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of our study was to determine whether maternal exposure to red raspberry leaf (RRL) and its constituents can permanently alter biotransformation of fluorogenic substrates by cytochrome P450 (CYP) in the livers of male and female offspring. Nulliparous female rats received vehicle, raspberry leaf, kaempferol, quercetin, or ellagic acid orally once breeding had been confirmed until parturition. Hepatic microsomes were prepared from animals at birth (postnatal day 1 [PND1]), weaning (PND21), PND65, and PND120 to determine the biotransformation of 8 fluorogenic substrates. The pattern of biotransformation of all but 2 of the substrates was gender specific. Maternal consumption of RRL increased biotransformation of 3 substrates by female offspring at PND120 resulting in a more masculine profile. Kaempferol and quercetin had a similar effect to RRL. These results suggest that maternal consumption of either RRL or some of its constituents leads to long-term alterations of CYP activity in female offspring.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ToxicologySame topicPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismFrench-language works237,207