MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136197616 · doi:10.1139/y09-068

Protective effect of<i>Lycium barbarum</i>polysaccharide 4 on kidneys in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats

2009· article· en· W2136197616 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Zhao, Qingwang Li, Jian Li, Tao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell Walls
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Development Fund
KeywordsProtein kinase CStreptozotocinLyciumDiabetic nephropathyOxidative stressEndocrinologyInternal medicineChemistryAntioxidantPathogenesisReactive oxygen speciesKinaseKidneyPharmacologyMedicineDiabetes mellitusBiochemistryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lycium barbarum polysaccharide (LBP) has been shown to have hypoglycemic and antioxidative properties, although its mode of action is yet unknown. Because oxidative stress is implicated in the pathogenesis of diabetic nephropathy, we evaluated the protective effect of LBP-4, the major active component of Lycium barbarum, on the defensive antioxidative mechanism in kidneys in a streptozotocin-induced diabetic rat model. Moreover, we investigated the effects of LBP-4 on the activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) in isolated mesangial cells. The role of protein kinase C (PKC)-dependent and -independent pathways in LBP-4-reduced ERK1/2 was studied by bisindolylmaleimide (BIM) IV, an inhibitor of PKC. Diabetic rats treated with LBP-4 (10 mg/kg) for 8 weeks showed increased activity of antioxidant enzymes and increased scavenging of oxygen radicals, while the activity of PKC in the renal cortex was maintained at a physiological level. The decreased activation of ERK1/2 in mesangial cells, through the involvement of PKC, could explain the protective mechanism in kidneys of diabetic rats treated with LBP-4.

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)0.000
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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations55
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell WallsFrench-language works237,207