Evaluation by microarray of the potential safety of Sarracenia purpurea L. (Sarraceniaceae) a traditional medicine used by the Cree of Eeyou Istchee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess safety of the traditional antidiabetic extracts of either S. purpurea or its lead active principle, morroniside at the transcriptional level. The overarching objective was to profile and validate transcriptional changes in the cytochrome P450 family of genes, in response to treatment with S. purpurea ethanolic extract or its lead active, morroniside. METHODS: Transcriptional activity was profiled using a 19K human cDNA microarray in C2BBe1 cells, clone of Caco-2 intestinal cells, which are a model of first-pass metabolism (1, 2). Cells were treated with S. purpurea extract for 4 and 24 hrs, as well as the pure compound morroniside for 4 hrs, to determine their effects. RESULTS: No evidence of cytochrome P450 transcriptome regulation or of transcriptional activation of other diabetes relevant mRNA was detected after rigorous quantitative-PCR validation of microarray results. CONCLUSION: Our data do not support a transcriptional mechanism of action for either S. purpurea extract or its lead active, morroniside. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".