Effects of American Ginseng on Preimplantation Development and Pregnancy in Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In North America, a high proportion of pregnant women use herbal medications including North American ginseng. This medicinal plant contains high amounts of triterpene saponins (ginsenosides), which are the main bioactive compounds. It is important to assess ginseng's impact on all reproductive functions to ensure the safety of pregnant women and fetuses. In this study, we defined the concentration-responsive effects of North American alcoholic and aqueous ginseng extracts on preimplantation development in vitro and on pregnancy and post-partum development in the mouse. Two-cell mouse embryos were cultured with 5 different concentrations of whole ginseng root extracts, or ginsenosides Rb1, Rg1 and Re alone, a combinatorial ginsenoside solution and a crude polysaccharide fraction solution. Embryonic development and recovery from each treatment was assessed. To investigate the in vivo effects of ginseng extracts, female mice were gavaged with 50[Formula: see text]mg/kg/day, 500[Formula: see text]mg/kg/day or 2000[Formula: see text]mg/kg/day of either extract (treatment) or water (sham) for 2 weeks prior to mating and throughout gestation. Gestation period, litter size, pup growth and pup sex ratio were evaluated. Oral ginseng consumption did not significantly affect fertility or pregnancy in the mouse. High doses of ginseng (2000[Formula: see text]mg/kg/day) decreased maternal weight gain. Direct treatment of preimplantation embryos in vitro demonstrated that ALC and AQ extract treatment reduced development in a concentration responsive manner, while only ALC extract effects were largely reversible. Treatments with individual or combinatorial ginsenosides, or the polysaccharide fraction solution alone did not impair preimplantation development, in vitro. In conclusion, maternal oral consumption of ginseng has little negative impact on pregnancy in the mouse, however, direct exposure to ginseng extract during mouse preimplantation development in vitro is detrimental.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".