MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802968934 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2018.14.12

Anti-Nematodal Efficacy of Ivermectin (Oral) and Extracts of Coriandrum sativum in Sheep in Barani Livestock Production Research Institute (BLPRI) Kherimurat, District Attak Punjab Pakistan

2018· article· en· W2802968934 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Memrez Khushal Gigyani, Khurshaid Anwar, Muhammad Ovais Omer, Habibun Nabi, Insanud Din, Anwarud Din, Zill E. Huma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicHelminth infection and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoriandrumSativumIvermectinTraditional medicineBody weightBiologyVeterinary medicineAnimal scienceToxicologyMedicineBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthelmentic resistance (AR) is one of the major problems of livestock industry in developing countries. Using indigenous medicinal plants may be an alternate way to overcome this problem. Total 60 sheep nematode positive were selected and divided into 6 groups having 10 sheep each. Group A as un-treated control, group B was given Ivermectin at the dose rate of 0.2mg/kg body weight Group C and Group D was given the Chloroformic extract while Group E and F was given the Methalonic extract of Coriandrum sativum whole plant at the dose rate of 50 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg body weight respectively. After treatments, fecal eggs count reduction test (FECRT) (eggs/g) was carried out on day 7, 14 and 28. The EPG in untreated group at day 28 was increased 21.6%. Significant decrease in EPG was only observed at day 28 in Ivermectin treated group (92.6%) and Methanolic extract at a dose rate of 100 mg/kg body weight (60.69%). No significant results were recorded in remaining groups. It was concluded that 100 mg/kg body weight Methalonic extract of Coriandrum sativum would be a best alternative as anti-nematodal drug.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicHelminth infection and controlFrench-language works237,207