MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054464412 · doi:10.1055/s-2000-11122

Effect of Ginseng Saponins on Cold Tolerance in Young and Elderly Rats

2000· article· en· W2054464412 on OpenAlexaff
Lawrence Wang, Tze-Fun Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePlanta Medica · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCold toleranceGinsengThermogenesisCold stressSaponinHypothermiaMedicineED50IngredientAnimal scienceInternal medicineChemistryPharmacologyBiologyFood scienceBotanyBiochemistryObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute systemic injection of ginseng saponin (GS) significantly elevated both the total and maximum heat production in young rats (3-6 months) and improved their cold tolerance under severe cold (-10 degrees C under helium-oxygen). However, pretreating the animal with the optimal dose (10 mg/kg) of GS devoid of Rg1 and Rb1 failed to elicit any beneficial effect in improving the cold tolerance. Pretreating the animal with Rb1, but not Rg1, increased thermogenesis as well as cold tolerance in young rats. A similar beneficial effect in improving cold tolerance was also observed when old rats (26-28 months) were pretreated with the same doses of Rb1 (2.5 and 5.0 mg/kg). Our results indicate that Rb1 is the key ingredient in GS-mediated enhancement in thermogenic capacity and that both young and old rats can benefit from this treatment for enhanced cold tolerance.

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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations38
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlanta MedicaSame topicExercise and Physiological ResponsesFrench-language works237,207