MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081498084 · doi:10.1177/0748233709354554

Toxic effects of T-2 toxin on reproductive system in male mice

2009· article· en· W2081498084 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jianying Yang, Yong Fa Zhang, Ai Min Liang, Xiang Feng Kong, Yuan Xiao Li, Kai Wang, Ai Hua Jing, Shu Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueToxicology and Industrial Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoHenan University of Science and Technology
KeywordsToxinSpermTestosterone (patch)AndrologySemenEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologySpermatogenesisSemen qualityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was conducted to evaluate the effects of T-2 toxin on semen quality, fertility and serum testosterone concentration in mice. Adult male mice were mated with sexually mature untreated female mice after being exposed to intraperitoneal injection of T-2 toxin at 0, 5, 10 or 15 mg/kg body weight daily for 7 successive days. Semen quality, serum testosterone concentration and fertility of treated mice were assessed. The results showed that the number of abnormal spermatozoa increased significantly and a significant decrease in spermatozoa with integrated acrosome was observed in males treated with T-2 toxin at all doses, As well, the amount of live spermatozoa decreased significantly in mice treated with 10 and 15 mg/kg body weight T-2 toxin. Low pregnancy rate and high fetal resorption rate were observed when females were mated with T-2 toxin-exposed males. Testicular and cauda epididymal sperm counts, efficiency of sperm production and serum testosterone concentration were significantly reduced in mice treated with T-2 toxin at all doses in a dose-dependent manner. In conclusion, these findings indicated that T-2 toxin presented toxic effects on reproductive system of adult male mice.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxicology and Industrial HealthSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207