Lycopene modulates cholinergic dysfunction, Bcl-2/Bax balance, and antioxidant enzymes gene transcripts in monosodium glutamate (E621) induced neurotoxicity in a rat model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of monosodium glutamate (MSG) on brain tissue and the relative ability of lycopene to avert these neurotoxic effects were investigated. Thirty-two male Wistar rats were distributed into 4 groups: group I, untreated (placebo); group II, injected with MSG (5 mg·kg(-1)) s.c.; group III, gastrogavaged with lycopene (10 mg·kg(-1)) p.o.; and group IV received MSG with lycopene with the same mentioned doses for 30 days. The results showed that MSG induced elevation in lipid peroxidation marker and perturbation in the antioxidant homeostasis and increased the levels of brain and serum cholinesterase (ChE), total creatine phosphokinase (CPK), creatine phosphokinase isoenzymes BB (CPK-BB), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Glutathione S-transferase (GST), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and catalase (CAT) activities and gene expression were increased and glutathione content was reduced in the MSG-challenged rats, and these effects were ameliorated by lycopene. Furthermore, MSG induced apoptosis in brain tissues reflected in upregulation of pro-apoptotic Bax while lycopene upregulated the anti-apoptotic Bcl-2. Our results indicate that lycopene appears to be highly effective in relieving the toxic effects of MSG by inhibiting lipid peroxidation and inducing modifications in the activity of cholinesterase and antioxidant pathways. Interestingly, lycopene protects brain tissue by inhibiting apoptosis signaling induced by MSG.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".