Long-term treatment with royal jelly improves bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the anti-fibrotic potential of royal jelly (RJ) powder against bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis in rats. The rats were given RJ orally (25, 50, and 100 mg/kg per day) for 7 consecutive days before the administration of single intratracheal instillation of bleomycin (BLM) at 7.5 IU/kg. RJ doses were continued for 21 days after BLM exposure. Fibrotic changes in the lungs were studied by cell count and analysis of cytokine levels in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), histopathological examination, and assaying oxidative stress biomarkers in lung tissue. The results showed that BLM administration significantly increased the fibrotic changes, collagen content, and levels of malondialdehyde and decreased total thiol and glutathione peroxidase antioxidant contents in the rats' lung tissue. An increase in the level of cell counts and pro-inflammatory and pro-fibrotic cytokines such as TNF-α and TGF-β in BALF was observed. Also, it significantly decreased IFN-γ, an anti-fibrotic cytokine, in BALF. However, RJ (50 and 100 mg/kg) reversed all of these biochemical indices as well as histopathological alterations induced by BLM. The present study demonstrates that RJ, by its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, attenuates oxidative damage and fibrosis induced by BLM.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".