1083 Study on different gender of rats in glucose-L-NAME induced hypertension and insulin resistance as well as in the response to aspirin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To detect the sexual differentiation associated with oxidative stress, hypertension and insulin resistance on an accelerated experimental model of type II diabetes in rat. Methods and Results: Male and female Sprague-Dawley rats (225–250 g) chronically fed 10% of glucose were treated orally either with L-NAME (50 mg/kg/day) alone or with a combination of aspirin (100 mg/kg/day) for 4 weeks. L-NAME treatment in glucose-fed rats progressively increased the systolic blood pressure (with a telemetry device) by 59.3 mmHg (55.9%) in male and by 43.1 mmHg (40.2%) in female compare to control levels, enhanced the aortic and cardiac tissue superoxide production (with the lucigenin-enhanced chemiluminescence method) by 38.2% and 21.9% in male, 26.7% and 10.5% in female, and rose HOMA index by 4.6 times in male and by 2.5 time in female after 4 weeks treatment. The above differences between the male and the females were significant (P < 0.05). Simultaneous oral ASA treatment significantly attenuated the L-NAME plus glucose-induced increases in blood pressure by -34.4 mmHg (-20.8%) in male and by -17.1 mmHg (-11.5%) in female, in the aortic and the cardiac superoxide production (-24.9% and -16.9 % in male, -9.7 % and -8.1 % in female), in HOMA index by -66.0% in male and by -41.9% in female. Conclusions: Male rats are more susceptible to glucose-L-NAME-induced oxidative stress, hypertension, and insulin resistance than females. In addition, the male rats are also more sensitive than female rats to the antioxidant and preventive effects of aspirin against hypertension and diabetes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".