MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050225209 · doi:10.5376/mpr.2013.03.0011

<i>In vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> Antiviral Potential of Hot Aqueous Extract of <i>Ocimum sanctum</i> and <i>Argemone mexicana</i> Leaves

2013· article· en· W2050225209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. Varshney

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicinal Plant Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfectious bursal diseaseNewcastle diseaseIn vivoVirusIn vitroCytopathic effectTiterOcimumVirologyFibroblastBiologyChemistryMicrobiologyBiochemistryVirulenceHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was undertaken to explore the in vitro antiviral potential of hot aqueous extract (HAE) of Ocimum sanctum (OS) and Argemone mexicana (AM) leaves against Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and Infectious bursal disease virus(IBDV) in chicken embryo fibroblast (CEF) cell culture. First the nontoxic dose of HAE of OS and AM was determined in CEF. Doses of OS and AM below 20 mg/mL and 5 mg/mL respectively were found to be nontoxic to CEF in RPMI 1640 media. Anti NDV activity was determined by absence/lower cytopathic effect (CPE) in CEF and lower HA titer of cell culture supernatant. Anti IBDV activity was determined by absence/lower CPE in CEF. Besides in vivo antiviral effects of HAE of OS and AM against NDV and IBDV were evaluated in chicken model. 250 mg/kg body weight oral dose of HAE of OS and AM was found ideal and nontoxic in chickens and experimental chickens were fed this dose for 21 days for determination of in vivo antiviral effect. On 22 nd day respective groups of chickens were challenged orally with ID 50 dose of NDV and IBDV. OS and AM fed chickens challenged with either of the virus were better protected as compared to unfed controls.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinal Plant ResearchSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207