Separate and Conjugated in vitro Effects of Clofibrate and of an Organic Extract of Rat Amniotic Fluid on Microperoxisomes of Fetal Mouse Small Intestine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Separate and conjugated effects of clofibrate and of an organic extract of rat amniotic fluid (RAF) on microperoxisomal response were studied in 15-day-old fetal mouse small intestine in organ culture. At the light-microscopic level, DAB-positive microperoxisomes were not observed in intestinal explants cultured for 48 h with Trowell T8-medium either with (group 1) or without clofibrate (control group) or with the organic extract of RAF alone (group 2). In presence of both clofibrate and the organic extract (group 3), microperoxisomes were readily identified. At the fine structural level, microperoxisomes measured 150-175 nm in diameter in controls and in group 1 and 2. In group 3, numerous microperoxisomes measured up to 0.4 micron in diameter. Total and specific catalase activities exhibited significant decreases when intestinal segments were cultured solely in Trowell T8-medium for 48 h. Addition of clofibrate (1), or of the organic extract of RAF (2), or of both (3) to Trowell T8-medium induced significant increases in total and specific catalase activities: 1.43- and 1.40-fold (1), 2.12- and 2.66-fold (2) and 2.92- and 3.17-fold (3). These results indicate that an organic extract of RAF contains a factor that (a) induces the formation of intestinal microperoxisomes and (b) potentiates the action of clofibrate.
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) | 0.000 | 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".