Physiological role of reactive oxygen species as promoters of natural defenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been 60 yr since the discovery of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in biology and the beginning of the scientific community's attempt to understand the impact of the unpaired electron of ROS molecules in biological pathways, which was eventually noted to be toxic. Several studies have shown that the presence of ROS is essential in triggering or acting as a secondary factor for numerous pathologies, including metabolic and genetic diseases; however, it was demonstrated that chronic treatment with antioxidants failed to show efficacy and positive effects in the prevention of diseases or health complications that result from oxidative stress. On the contrary, such treatment has been shown to sometimes even worsen the disease. Because of the permanent presence of ROS in organisms, elaborate mechanisms to adapt with these reactive molecules and to use them without necessarily blocking or preventing their actions have been studied. There is now a large body of evidence that shows that living organisms have conformed to the presence of ROS and, in retrospect, have adapted to the bioactive molecules that are generated by ROS on proteins, lipids, and DNA. In addition, ROS have undergone a shift from being molecules that invoked oxidative damage in regulating signaling pathways that impinged on normal physiological and redox responses. Working in this direction, this review unlocks a new conception about the involvement of cellular oxidants in the maintenance of redox homeostasis in redox regulation of normal physiological functions, and an explanation for its essential role in numerous pathophysiological states is noted.-Roy, J., Galano, J.-M., Durand, T., Le Guennec, J.-Y., Lee, J. C.-Y. Physiological role of reactive oxygen species as promoters of natural defenses.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".