MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328524161 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2013-0082

Potentiation of antioxidant effect of dietary tender cluster beans (<i>Cyamopsis tetragonoloba</i>) by garlic (<i>Allium sativum</i>) in high-cholesterol-fed rats

2013· article· en· W2328524161 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shubhra Pande, Krishnapura Srinivasan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGarlic and Onion Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntioxidantAllium sativumCyamopsisAscorbic acidFood scienceChemistryCholesterolLiliaceaeGlutathione reductaseContext (archaeology)BiochemistryBiologyBotanyGlutathione peroxidaseGuarCatalase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The antioxidant role of tender cluster beans (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba, CB), a rich source of soluble fibre, was investigated in a hypercholesterolemia-induced oxidative stress situation in rats. In the context of dietary garlic (Allium sativa) potentiating the hypocholesterolemic influence of CB, we also examined if dietary garlic enhances the antioxidant potential of CB. Groups of Wistar rats were rendered hypercholesterolemic by feeding them a 0.5% cholesterol diet for 8 weeks. Dietary interventions were made by inclusion of 15% tender CB powder or 1% garlic powder or their combination in a high-cholesterol diet. Concentrations of antioxidant molecules and activities of antioxidant enzymes in blood and liver were examined. Dietary CB displayed an antioxidant influence in terms of elevating ascorbic acid and glutathione concentrations and stimulating the activities of antioxidant enzymes both in blood and liver. The antioxidant effect of dietary CB was generally potentiated by co-administration of garlic. Thus, consumption of tender CB and garlic together could form a strategy for improving the body's antioxidant status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicGarlic and Onion StudiesFrench-language works237,207