Effects of fructus forsythiae extracts on scavenging oxygen free radical and aliphatic free radical
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scavenging ability of fructus forsythiae ethanol extracts on R·,OH· and O2-· was evaluated by means of photometric method,using BHA as control sample.And the relationship between inhibitory behavior to free radical and extracts concentration and time was also investigated and compared.Experimental results demonstrated that fructus forsythiae ethanol extracts could scavenge R· and inhibit oil oxidization significantly,and it could also scavenge OH· and O2-· efficiently,and the scavenging content 50%(EC50) of extracts was about 1.2 mg/mL and 100 μg/mL respectively.Under parallel experimental conditions the antioxidative ability of fructus forsythiae extracts is better than that of BHA,and fructus forsythiae extracts could be developed as a natural effective antioxidant.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Phytochemistry study of free radical scavenging by Forsythia fruit extracts.
It evaluates antioxidant activity of a plant extract, not research itself.
Phytochemical antioxidant assay of plant extracts; domain chemistry/biology.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".