Cerebral Epiphyseal Proteins and Melatonin Modulate the Hepatic and Renal Antioxidant Defense of Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cerebral epiphysis (pineal gland) secrets melatonin and number of other proteins and peptides. It was thus hypothesized that antioxidant properties of epiphyseal proteins and melatonin could potentially benefit from exogenous therapies. In view of the therapeutic potential of these proteins, the present experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of buffalo epiphyseal proteins (BEP, at 100 μg/kg BW, i.p.) and melatonin (MEL, at 10 mg/kg BW, i.p) on changes in hepatic and renal antioxidant enzymes of adult female Wistar rats. Buffalo epiphyseal proteins significantly (P < .05) increased hepatic lipid peroxidation (LPO), superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione reductase (GR), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), reduced glutathione (GSH), and renal LPO, catalase (CAT), GR, GSH, GPx levels as compared to control animals. Similarly, MEL treatment significantly (P < .05) up-regulated hepatic SOD and GPx activity, whereas CAT, GR, GPx, and GSH levels in renal tissues were increased while SOD and LPO remained unaffected. Buffalo epiphyseal protein treatment produced greater effects on hepatic GPx and renal CAT and GSH levels than did MEL. These findings support the conclusion that buffalo epiphyseal proteins and melatonin activate a number of antioxidant mechanisms in hepatic and renal tissues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".