Evaluation of the antiulcerogenic activity of violacein and its modulation by the inclusion complexation with β-cyclodextrin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of beta-cyclodextrin (betaCD) inclusion complexation on the ability of violacein to prevent gastric ulceration in mice were studied. Violacein-betaCD inclusion complexes were prepared in 1:1 and 1:2 molar ratios and analysed by differential scanning calorimetry and powder X-ray diffractometry. Violacein previously administered orally at 10 mg/kg significantly reduced indomethacin-induced gastric lesions, as well as 100 mg/kg of cimetidine (positive control). However, betaCD complexation in both molar ratios significantly potentiated the protective action of violacein. In the HCl--ethanol-induced gastric ulcer model, violacein and the 1:2 inclusion complex (10 mg/kg, p.o.) inhibited gastric damage by almost 85%, whereas a 63% reduction was observed for the positive control, lansoprazole, at 30 mg/kg. In contrast, treatment with the 1:1 inclusion complex resulted in almost total disappearance of the antiulcer activity in this model. No significant changes in stress-induced gastric injury were found. In addition, the 1:2 inclusion complex improved the antilipoperoxidant activity of violacein in rat liver cells exposed to t-butyl hydroperoxide, whereas the 1:1 complex was less active than violacein. In summary, the 1:2 betaCD inclusion complex has gastroprotective properties similar to or higher than that of violacein. An increase in mucosal defensive mechanisms and protection against peroxidative damage might be involved.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".